I might use some help with an allies game here

@thedesertfox @Tin-Can-of-the-Sea
You’re both right about ANZAC units. They have the best colour.

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Yes, but there are a couple differences between the editions. At a minimum, download and understand that rules for Pac '40 2nd Ed. in addition to the rules for Eur '40 2nd Ed. Also, Japan and ANZAC will be missing their own AA Gun sculpts. No game play affect to this, just something for those that like the pieces. Also, the 1st Ed ANZACs are Brits in Grey, it wasn’t until the 2nd Ed ANZACs that ANZAC got “New Zestralian” units.

Clear as mud?

-Midnight_Reaper

Ok there is some merit to building an AB for Gib UK1, and merging all available ships to sz92. The ability to send the UK Med navy to the Atlantic will most likely table a German Sea Lion buy for G2 w/o dropping a bunch of inf on London. As others pointed out an AB at Gib is also very helpful in staging allied fleet in sz91 as the game goes on. You would defiantly need to take into account what Germany bought G1 though. A loaded carrier, cruiser, damaged BB (that will auto fix on Germany’s turn) and a couple transports sitting in sz112 is a real threat to your new Gib base with only air. In this scenario you should be looking at using the Med transport to bring over an inf and the Malta AAA gun to protect your ftrs, but that weakens Egypt.

Many people are in the camp of forgoing Taranto, to spare the UK Med fleet. Sometimes they pull back into the Red Sea (sz81), or make a stand in sz92 (as AldoRaine posted) and bringing in the India fleet in is also an option. The point is that the Italian navy will eventually come out to play and it is easier to kill it when they don’t have the support of the Rome AB. Plus as others pointed out the Italians might add to their toy boats which means fewer units heading to Russia.

The thing is that if you do merge all available UK ships to sz92, and build an AB for Gib you really don’t want to get double hit by the Italians then the Germans play mop-up w/o taking heavy losses. eames57 took the words right out of my mouth, you have to block out the Italian navy by placing a dd in sz94 (the French in sz93 completes the block).

You still run the risk of getting hit by the Luftwaffe, but that would also cripple the German air force so IMO it would be worth it. It’s better to take out German planes over Italian navy especially early in the game. At some point (maybe later when the US comes over) the Italian navy will be at the bottom of the Med, where the Luftwaffe is essential on all fronts through out the game. So in retrospect it isn’t in Germany’s best long term interest to attack you in sz92, so there is a good chance they won’t.

Please see

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37460.msg1508726#msg1508726

The allies can (and usually will) still win the game if being 30-40 IPCs behind, IF they can correct this pretty soon. Let’s say in ~5 turns max., they must at least get a total equalization of both economies.

Having said that, if there is no visible possibility to (at least) equalize, the allies will have lost the game even if their shortfall is only small. I have no exact figures here but I bet the allies will have lost the game even if their shortfall is 5 IPCs per turn only, if they have no possibility to repair this.

Sometimes every IPC (per turn) counts…

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33119.0

@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.

@Axisplaya:

@theROCmonster:

Possibly even T3 if mistakes were made.

Anything is possible with enough mistakes from one side…

@theROCmonster:

Japs only need Hawaii, hong kong, phillipines, and calcutta. I can see Japan taking all these by T4

I can’t….If Japan can get Hong Kong, Phi, Haw and Ind by T4 when Allies don’t commit huge mistakes, then the game is completely broken.

I’ve not only seen it, I’ve done it.  The game is not completely broken - however.  America just has to keep investing in the Pacific, the allies lose if there is not a HUGE investment by America in the Pacific EARLY.