What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

@J-o-C I’ve been considering trying attacking the neutrals, mostly for the helluva it. Thanks for laying out thoughts. As far as multi-national forces sequenced, I’m considering sending in U.K. forced into Saudi’s Arabia if conditions permit. Also, ANZAC on Argentina As a capper, maybe Chile also but Argentina first.

Sweden would be tough to get as Allies unless already in Norway so might Axis taking it might the cost of opening Spain and Turkey and make you commit to invading Europe form the south, not necessarily a bad thing.

A lot of times what usually breaks the Allies is how poor US reacts to what side of the world to fight on.

You need a minumum of about 10 posts before you can post links or attachements.  This is due to the forum’s anti-spam software.  The moderators (dezrtfish, DarthMaximus, Guerrilla Guy) can move your post the correct section of the forum.  Send them a personal message if they don’t notice your post in the next day or two.

I think the point is, all three of my opinions infer that Germany is waiting until at least round 3 to declare war on Russia.  Personally, I see no good reason to declare war on them before then anyway and, personally, I prefer to have Italy declare war on Round 3 with Germany maybe not even declaring war on Round 4…that way Italy can take the road and Germany can reinforce it.  That allows Germany to collect the NO for Russia and move towards Moscow.

You can push for Egypt after taking Russia. It can be difficult.

@Spendo02:

@Krieghund:

The US cannot win this battle.  The fighters will continue to defend in the air until the battle is over.  The Japanese fighters and US subs can’t hit each other, so the fighters will sink transports until the US retreats.  If the US wishes to conduct this amphibious assault, it must bring units that are capable of hitting the fighters.

This is one of those unique situations where you are required to take Trn as losses before subs because that is all the unit can hit?

Yes.  They just need to be the only legal selection for a loss.  That might mean that planes have no other target (like this example), or that Sub hits have no other ship targets, or that the defenders hit everything else in a round of combat and need to assign some more hits before the defender retreats.  Remember, the defender still has the option to retreat, if they can, and transports are only automatically destroyed when they’re attacked, not when attacking (unless the attacker has no place to retreat).

I see what you’re trying to do with these ideas, but you need to be careful or you’ll make the US-China partnership in the game become a penility for the US which wouldnt be fair. Ideas I have heard have been to do things like;

If the burma road is open allow the US to replace the Chinese fighter if it gets destroyed.
If the burma road is open AND the US is at war allow them to purchase 1 unit for the Chinese per turn.

I like both of these and would better represent the US’s support to the Chinese, and also the importance of the Buram road. The second idea would need to be limited to land and air units only (obviously) but to have no more then 1 of each non-infantry/arty unit type (no more then 1 fighter, tatical bobmber, tank, mech infantry, ect…)

Thanks guys.