Best Feeling in Round 1

@Yoper:

I am especially interested in this simply because of how this will affect my use of it in the A&A tournament that I run.  Being that it is a timed event for the individual games, I am curious as to how the extra need for naval units will slow down the Allies in building up for their attack into Europe.

I’d say it can slow down the Allies from 1-3 turns. It really depends on how many naval and air units G has at the start of G2. It might be enough to sink the AC and 2 DDs that seems to be the regular UK buy for UK1, depending on where they are placed. It also depends if the US landed on Algeria on US1 or not and how Africa is going for the Allies.

I do understand what it does look like and I have just one suggestion play it out.  :-D  I also bought 6 tanks and 1 Fighter and that won me a lot of games.  I have also bought 1 Carrier and 3 Transports G1 and placed in SZ 5 and that won a lot as well.

To add to the fighters prowess each time you use them it is like using 4 tanks that if used right will seldom die.  Count that up over 2-5 turns.  I am not a fan of playing by IPC worth I thought I would just throw that out there.  I am a fan of position.  I think IPC’s are only a tool to fight with and not the fight  :wink:

Thanks for the input and I will play some more land games to see where that idea is coming from.  :-D

My style is more ‘tight’ than ‘wild’, but I’ve done:
R1: 1art 4tnk (all in Moscow and Caucasus empty, if Ukraine doesn’t fall to keep Caucasus defensible)
G1: 4inf 7art, also 8inf 4art and the usual 9inf 2art 1tnk

Guess more frequent ‘reactive’ buys don’t count, like:
UK1: 5inf 3tnk (when a large landing threatens)
UK1: 3ftr +US1: 2bmb 4inf (when Germans fleet comes out)
J1: 2 factories (when scattered UK ships are hard to beat fast)

I do this as a bid because it greatly increases Japan’s options on round 1. While a transport bid to SZ50 does allow for a possible invasion of Hawaii its other options are rather limited.

The transport added to the E. Indies fleet not only allows the mentioned amphibs but is also fodder if need be for a strike on British naval units in sz30 or sz34.

Again I think it gives Japan the MOST options on round one.

Parings are going to be rolled shortly, but there will be 3 open slots for late registrants…

Paint, you have nothing to lose in trying…

I’ve seen fast carriers help in 2 specific situations:

1)  Japan forgets that the Pearl Harbor Carrier and fighters can get to SZ 61 resulting in the loss of all of Japan’s unprotected transports.
2)  America builds one last carrier and two fighters for that assault on SZ 60 (SZ 55 to SZ 60 is 3 spaces.) Or even just buys two fast carriers so the 4 fighters in W. Canada can reach SZ 60.

But how often does that happen?

How much better off would naval warfare in the Pacific be if America had 3 fighters on the flight deck of a carrier, or could recover a bomber on an empty carrier?

@ncscswitch:

You would not have the income to maximize productions at all 3 IC’s… EVER (unless the game was already over).

2 INF in Karelia for a cost of 21 IPC’s over 2 turns is not a good Russian buy… just buy 4 ARM in Moscow 1 turn, and send them to Karelia the next instead :-)

sending tanks into st. petsburg makes more sense but you only have to build in moscow when japan suddenly comes a tapping As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door. for it is Only this, and nothing more.

The rule for holding VC’s is that at teh end of the US’s move (the complete turn of play) X number of VC’s are controlled by one side or the other.

8 VC’s is basically an Axis win (except in very special cases like a 2 turn limit test game where Russia goes suicidal in defense of the Allied VC’s)

Instead of 8, play for 9 for victory.

When one side or the other controls 9 VC’s at the end of a turn, then there is basically no doubt as to what side won.