Help! American declaration of war privilege

@ShadowHAwk:

@Charles:

Ok, so a while ago Italy became upsetting for me after Taranto…now Japan is upsetting me.  I tried this strategy as the US and succeeded. My opponents got wise. Now whenever I play as Japan I get mowed over by this strategy :cry:  now we need a “How to beat Plan Orange” guide.  Seriously.

P.S. The key to this strategy as the U.S. is to simply place a submarine or more in each Japanese convoy zone (in a standard game there will be 10); just work out the details of getting there and Japan is going to be losing ground in Asia very soon because they either have to build a ton of destroyers, or build a few destroyers(only taking out your subs in big zones like 6 and 19), or totally ignore which is admitting defeat. Good luck Japan.

Maby play the standard 2nd edition rules without a bid so the allies need to devide their attention a bit more.
Good to see that the allies are becomming better at dealing with the axis.

But I never use bids!
@simon33:

@Charles:

Ok, so a while ago Italy became upsetting for me after Taranto…now Japan is upsetting me.  I tried this strategy as the US and succeeded. My opponents got wise. Now whenever I play as Japan I get mowed over by this strategy :cry:  now we need a “How to beat Plan Orange” guide.  Seriously.

Here’s what I might try:

Take Guam.
Base one DD + scrambling fighters off Philippines, Guam and Japan. That only leaves two holes for the Asian coast, SZ18 + SZ36. The latter is a long way around for the US to go. Basing a fleet in SZ18 can plug the other hole. You need to pick off the UK and/or ANZACs if they come through the bottom though.

The above won’t work if Japan is already being pushed back significantly.

If I’m the U.S. and Japan does this, first thing I’m going to do is say “Yay! My subs forced 3 destroyers and 9 fighters to sit around and do nothing!” Now that’s before I even get a chance to counter it…

If Japan does a great J1 DOW on W.Allies,  ie:loses just 1-2 inf… ,

how should US respond? It’s first 2-3  rounds of buy?
And UK India? Should it keep its FTRS or send them to the Med?

Thanks for the clarification Wittmann.

@Commando:

@ghr2:

@Commando:

@ghr2:

Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory?  The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States.  You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.

I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.

Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable.  Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.

It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency.  If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue.  Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.

@manincellv:

What is the current rule on this?

If damaged lets say to 3 markers and I repair 1 marker, can it still function?  Or does all the damage need to be repaired to get the AB/NB back to functioning?

Thanks.

Bases may only be damaged for a maximum of 6 points.

Bases are……

Operational with 2 or less points of damage

Inoperative with 3 or more points of damage

So no, you don’t need to fully repair bases in order to use them.

@Woodstock:

@BadSpeller:

@Woodstock:

What Inmajor said. I expect to buy a game that’s finished.

Maybe look at it this way, we were able to get the game 2 years before it was released.  Many addtional playtesters are tuning the game before it’s final release.

So I am getting a whole new updated copy once they’re done playtesting?  :roll:

Nope, but you can BUY Larry’s NEW AND IMPROVED AXIS AND ALLIES 1941 edition ™, for only 3 easy payments of $39.99!  AND get to do the ridiculous “revised setups” B.S. all over again cause he spent all his time “fixing” the current edition!

The problem is that, in most of my games, a sealion has occured, which means the US has to spend mostly in the Atlantic to liberate the UK.

Thanks.  Kinda disappointing however…  :cry: