Please throw us a bone!!!

Thanks for your reply. Makes perfect sense.

I haven’t seen any warping of my boards (yet).

For the records: my box arrived undamaged, although I still have to check the playing pieces.

Japan, of all the countries, has the most opportunities, units to take advantage of these opportunities, and time to attempt them.  These moves might cost them some of their planes, but those are expendable(start with NINE!) to further expansion as well as most easily replaced due to their range and relative low cost.

By mentioning time, Japan is isolated enough to be able to recover if their opening round attacks go poorly.

J1 Buy = 2 tpt, inf = 17/17

Combat:
2 inf (sz61) via sz61 tpt > brn *MT

CA,BB (sz61) > sz50 (dd, tpt)

inf (car) inf(oki) via sz51 tpt
2 inf (jap) via sz 62 tpt

3 inf, art (sz61) via sz61 tpts > bur (inf)

2 ftr (sz61) > sz35 (dd,tpt)
2 ftr (sz57) > sz56 (dd,tpt)
2 ftr (sz57), dd (sz51) > sz53 (BB)

However you want to attack China on the ground.  This is not the strongest push, but also not the weakest.
3 inf (man), inf (kia) > Sui (inf)
2 inf (kia), ftr (jap) > fuk (inf)
3 inf (fic),  ftr (for), ftr (man) > yun (inf,ftr)

I find the US/UK vs Japan option (1941) is very viable.  Maybe I am misreading what was said before, but it actually seems more viable to me than a traditional kill Germany first. (I think this is because Italy can liberate/take land and Germany can reinforce it with fighters to defend now, a very significant and major defensive capability!)

America may be limited to 52 IPC or less a round if they go Kill Japan first.  However, England should be making significantly more than the 20-30 IPC they get in a kill Germany/ignore Japan campaign because of the NO in the Pacific, the non-loss of the NO in the Indian Ocean/Africa/Australia/etc, the increased land ownership in the Asian SE and SE Pacific Islands, etc.  Meanwhile, Japan shouldn’t be earning too much either, America could, realistically, be earning near to more than double what Japan is if played right.

Approximately half of the U-Boat losses were due to Aircraft.

However in this version of Axis and Allies subs may not be hit by aircraft without an attacking destroyer present. Axis and Allies is not a very accurate recreation of WWII. However, it is a fun game.

I agree with must of your post, Subotai, excepting by tech issue (I don’t think it’s really broken in AA50, but that’s matter for a new thread) and the bids issue. Of course, 1 inf each territory in soviet frontier and Egypt would crush the balance, and that is the reason for not bidding allied units: Europe and Africa are NOT broken, it’s Asia the one broken, mainly China (but also India and swarm of jap starting trannies).

If something is not wrong, don’t touch it. Fix the broken one instead -> China. Restricting bids to chinese units is the solution. And so, we should bid like this:

(Or something similar)

Builder_Chris is right, you won’t be able to hold africa without US assistance. if you left all of your african forces down there, you could slow them down for a couple of rounds though

if the US is going for all out Pacific, i would still try to convince them to use whatever they have in western usa in the african theatre to help. also, i always build an IC in india if japan can’t take it feasibly turn j2. this leaves you the option of sending tanks to africa once Japan is booted off China

Thanks, I would be interested in the list of changes you made.

I’ll post my complete setup in the House Rules section once I’m satisfied with it. I’m still testing it for now. As you said, it’s very similar to what you have done in the Pacific, but Europe is a bit different. The main difference is that I gave Germany control of East Poland and Baltic States, so the game starts a few months into Barbarossa (late summer or so), while the German still had momentum.