Allied Playbook - G40 Collection of Essays - Compiled by jacobgeo24 Nov 18-19 2023

@andrewaagamer said in Land aircraft in neutral allied territory:

Only LAND units may take control of the now uncontrolled Neutral.

Precisely we are not talking about an uncontrolled Neutral, but about an uncontrolled allied territory.

@chernobylime Aircraft are subject to defensive fire Just like ground units, so in your scenario the attacking aircraft fires, and then the defending infantry fire, regardless of there being any AAA present. The only unit that cannot fire back at aircraft is the submarine. As for Anti Aircraft Artillery, they only fire once before the conventional combat begins. AAA may fire one shot per attacking aircraft, up to a maximum of three shots.

So in the scenario you provide if the Germans attack the Russian territory with say 3 Planes and the Soviets have 3 Infanty and 1 AAA then the AAA will fire its three shots, the attacker removes any planes that are hit, and then the battle begins. AAA may be taken as casualties but do not fire again.

I don’t see a flight path on the map that would be shortened by being able to fly over the Pripet Marshes, so I suppose that it’s not particularly relevant from an A&A perspective whether or not planes can fly over them.

@knp7765:

As Russia, you should definitely grab Norway. With the large US fleet there and London getting liberated, it’s very doubtful Germany will be putting any more boats in the water (…)

I agree completely. I want Norway out of the way first round after London is liberated, just to rid Germany of another 8 IPCs. If the Germans position themselves in Finland however, USA will take Norway instead. Otherwise Germany can enjoy those 8IPCs one more turn.

@knp7765:

(…)Do you plan to liberate Paris if US troops successfully land in Normandy or Holland? (…)

I usually wait to liberate Paris for the exact same reasons as you mentioned. It is a matter of being able to hold it or not. Trading it back and forth with Germany is often unacceptable (but not always), especially if the USA has to spend a lot in the Pacific (sometimes I am forced to invest near 100% in the Pacific with the USA from US7 and onwards because the Japs have taken Calcutta and are investing near 100% on also getting Hawai). For that reason I keep my men and TRS next to each other in Gibraltar, London, Normandy or wherever they are safe while being the most aggressive.

In this particular situation however, it remains to be seen. If taking Paris means the fall of Berlin in a series of falling dominoes then taking Paris it is!

Might be worth a road trip to Colorado :).

@MacNaughton:

With all this going on, if Russia rolls a couple tanks and mech infantry through the North of China too, China will have the coastal territories liberated by turn 4 and Japan will be sunk by turn 7. I like it.

All this implies sleeping Axis…

@JimmyHat:

I don’t like the rule either, I think that so long as you have a factory you can earn and spend ipcs.  After you lose your last factory then you hold onto your unspent ipcs until you or an ally liberates one of your factories.  This seems more realistic to me, but I think the current rule is there more to prove that once your capital is captured you might as well surrender.

That’s an interesting idea.  So all nations would be treated like China and keep their unspent IPCs with hopes of one of their factories getting liberated, even if it’s not necessarily their capital.

Actually, there is a kind of historical precedent for having to capture the Axis capitals.  In the “Why We Fight” series, at the end of each film it shows a quote from the Secretary of War Henry Wallace that said “Victory can only be acheived by the complete and unconditional surrender of Germany and Japan.”  So, as far as the game goes, if you have Japan surrounded but your Japan player doesn’t want to surrender, then you just have to keep pounding him with SBRs until you build up a big enough invasion force and take him out.