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

@flyingbadger said in Loading units onto allied transports in the same round that the ally unloaded them:

… even though the US transports have already loaded/unloaded on that round?

During US turn rules concerning movement and loading/unloading transports apply to the US. So restrictions apply to US turn, see rulebook’s Transport rules. They do not apply to the entire round. In your scenario it is France’s / UK’s turn.

This is why the rules that you quoted say “You (as French or as UK) move land units aboard”, and “You (as French or as UK) offload your units.”. The US transport has no active role here, as it is not US’ turn.

Also depends on IF:
UK brings in the extra Ftr and a Bmbr.

But as SH allready explained:
What is your goal with Italy. Stall as long as possible UK in the Med.?
Getting aggressiv?
Looking for NO’ s?
Or soften UK RN for the German Luftwaffe?

If you scramble with Italy or not reveals also your future Plans in the Med. :wink:

@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.

@WILD:

Wow this thread was cool to revive. Haven’t heard from many of those guys much as of late, but they have some great insight for the allies.

Garg’s point was for the allies to win, they first must not loose. Keeping in mind that Cow was part of the conversation, and is one of the best Japanese players (that thrives on early Japanese attacks). Garg’s point of stacking Anz early and def Hawaii so the Japanese can’t steal a win on the Pac side is directly linked to very good Japanese play. It is also noted that the Anz needs to build some navy and air to help the US, but their main goal is to not loose Sidney.

There is also some good advice about how to use Egypt to supply air to Moscow to prop it up (building an IC & AB as early as plausible), while also building up Egypt to be a last resort defensive stand if Moscow falls. I also like that Q mentioned evacuating India as an option to turtlng and losing all your units. I have evacuated India in the past and traded it to stall the Japanese (they can’t land air on it, so it could be a good chance to kill Japanese ground units). This is a little painful because of the stupid capture capital/plunder rule that should be a one time only IMO (house rule). Those India units can really help in Egypt or Russia if they are alive, and is doable if the Anz and Hawaii aren’t weak, or are shielded. Plus once the Japanese take India they need to decide if they immediately head to the 6th VC for the win (Sidney or Hawaii), or possibly make a move on the Mid East, Egypt, Africa, or north to Russia (maybe linking up with more Japanese units pounding through China).

I agree with all this, generally speaking. Japan can take any one power at the time. The only way to slow down Japan is for all nations to cause Japan to enter attritive battles. E.g., put Japan in a position where they have juicy targets to hit (with something to compensate you for it, like time, loss of position or gain on another front), but too many of them to address.

UK pac is the answer to EURO axis after a KJF… that’s why people do KJF. Japan shutdown… ok uk pacific you make 22-30 right? ok that is what russia was making before he went down… you go hold egypt down till usa supply train shows up. don’t worry anzac got yo back. japan makes 0 from naval bombard… it can be so sick sometimes.

I don’t like the aa gun buy. also I tend to buy strait inf for uk1, because I sink the hell out of italy. I don’t care if I get sea lioned. Gives usa something to do in the atlantic, because I tend to buy some mech for russia anyway. so the turn london is nabbed i got romania hold and can hit the other adjacent to russia spots.

Which is why I never really minded sea lion so much. russians bank hard. i save persia for them to blitz too, I always do that russian income thing in iraq/persia and if i can get the two italy territories in east africa, I do it too. just 3 mech all i need to start banking. get a bomber to bring down there so 2-3 mech inf 1 bomber kills 1 ethiopia guy or w/e unless uk has it.

we played a game the other week that you could move your capital when captured (not for victory conditions, just for building and production) to any territory you had an IC on, Major if you had it, or choice of minor otherwise.  While it certainly added a different aspect of allowing you to continue to build, it resulted in nations never being defeated.

Nice, well with depreciation of the dollar I would say that would probably be about what I pay for something like that as well. I will have to do some digging to find a place that does that, because I do admit that the ridges irritate me, not to mention the board separating from time to time if someone hits the edge or something.