Need help defending as UK until USSR joins

@Polishpowerhouse you’re welcome. Glad it helped

Ok, i concede you can take and hold bryansk G4 with @aagamerz13 's strategy

@Bob_A_Mickelson:

I’ve been looking to add these custom IPC poker chips to spruce up my game, however they are quite expensive.

http://iwillnevergrowup.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=50

How many poker chips do I need for global 1940? Will I need more than one set? What is your guys experience?

Thanks in advance.

I have the set too… I also found the default set a bit short… if I’m not mistaken, I have the default set, two sets of the 25IPC add-ons, and I custom-ordered an extra ten 10IPC chips (as mentioned by others, contact IWNGU directly to get IPCs in a non-set fashion, as I did by ordering extra 10IPC chips).

Bottom line, I was happy with the number of 1s and 5s in the default set, but needed more 10s, and got two sets of the 25s.

yes

We had a game where Axis totally dominated, I mean, allied pieces were basically off the game board, put away, done. We called it day, left the game as it was, one of the players came back over the next day, and it was Germany/Italy VS Japan, where within 5 hours, Japan ruled the world :)

We only did something like that once, but was a cool variant. I don’t think I would like to start that way, but continuing a war after its over by a new declaration or war was a nice touch.

@ShadowHAwk:

@barney:

So a solution to the KJF only allied way to win would be ?
Seems like Japan would have to be weakened and possibly the US as well?

Maby change the turn order so the game becomes more balanced.

How about.
Germany, USSR, Italy, UK, Anzac, US, Japan, China, France.

This makes a decent game in the med because Italy actualy keeps its fleet.
UK-pac gets 1 more turn buys effectively and a battleship.
Anzac fleet is grouped.
US fleet can group.

So less easy targets, India has 1 turn extra buys so harder to get from japan. Same for the anzac.

At least J1 will be less predictable, UK1 will be less predictable and it gives the allies the initiative in the pacific.

While this completely cripples Japan it makes the European Axis absolute monsters. Don’t see how the axis would ever loose. UK looses his fleet off Egypt right away and his forces in Alexandria. Italy takes Egypt T2 100% and then what do the allies do?

Ya, you are more able to invest money into Europe as US, but could you stop a monster Italy/Germany?

One big thing I’d like to note is that I really don’t like that Anzac can can open for US. This is way too powerful.

@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.

The “only” is implicitly on page 20 of the Rulebook, as that is the only place in the Rulebook that taking control of an allied power’s territory is mentioned.  In the absence of any other rules regarding taking such control, one may assume that it’s the only way it can be done, since no other provision is made for doing so.