Daniel
However in one game, the Fleet had ended up in the Med somehow, and so the Germans in one game built 3 transports 3inf3tanks alongside the same already built alongside 4bomber 6 fighters, but I as the British cheekily placed one submarine off the coast of Denmark, to the cry of “damn you British-submarine-2+ dice roll taking out the german boatwaffe because Hitler forgot to build one lousy destroyer”.  Britain proper cannot fall, and the Empire will survive in the east, if Japan goes China.  In most games Britain has been dominant, as it can build anywhere.

that is against the rules. fleets can choose to ignore subs. sub blocking does not exist in AA50.

if uk has luck unlocking improved production in round 1, they would be able to built two ic´s in africa, placing six to seven units a turn. secure africa and march to russia through persia. without spending a dime on fleet. they could built men in africa and bombers in uk, to bomb italy and germany.

i am not talking about this as at strat since it is obviously not something you could plan for. this is more of a what if thing, that would mess up the games every once in a while. and it is bound to happen for someonesooner or later.

this strategy was discussed in this thread http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=12363.0

the uk just drops a destroyer as a blocker in the north sea. kills your few surface ships in the baltic with air units. The following round your subs will either remain locked up in the north sea or killed by the uk, depending on the will of the uk.

TexCapPrezJimmy
I like this way of thinking. People have been down on the subs, but I think they are key to any successful Allied strategy. I like the disruption that a bunch of Pacific subs would cause. In another thread I posted how a stack of subs on the coast would actually serve as a good defense. The idea being, any ship wanting to attack a coastline (thinking pacific theatre here) would need to move within two spaces of the coast the move before. But if there’s a stack of subs on that coast, WHAM, subs attack before the fleet can amphibious assault. They only hit ships, and after the destroyers have been hit, planes can’t hit back. I guess it’s not so much a defense as a deterrent. But, compared to aircraft carriers and fighters, a relatively inexpensive deterrent.

i don´t think this is true. i japan`s mainfleet is in z62 (japan) your fleet would have to be in zone 56 or 65 to be out of striking range. you would probably choose 65 to cover a larger area. now if japan wants to attack alaska here is what they will do:
japan moves the fleet to zone 59 and places a destroyer in zone 57( i think its 57 but cant see it on the pic at bgg. but the one in between 59 and 56).
the result is that japan can´t be hit by your subs, and in order for your subs to be out of striking range of the japanese main fleet you would need to move all the way to zone 55 or 54. this means z64 is out of your subs range and japan is free to offloald in alaska. and that you would have to move your subs within range of japan in order to be able to apply pressure on their fleet again, in which case japan could destroy your subs in round one attacking with only airplanes and one destroyer, allowing you to at max kill one unit :-D

thanks! I will have him email the edited pic.

hi! is there anyway to play axis and allies online by email, without downloading a program. i am backpacking, and i only have axcess to computers in internetcafes. is there some kind of program that would allow for my friend to email me a picture of the entire map, so i could mail my moves to him, and he could update the map after each turn… I really need help, haven´t played for like four months… :cry:

quote from com jen

That stated, I have gone KJF successfully building everything in SZ 10.  Trick here is to unload into Africa, securing Africa while building up your navy.  While the Axis believe you are just building a fleet to defend against the Luftwaffe so you can attack North and South, you are really building a seed navy to move into the Pacific. (Which from SZ 22 is one turn away, two turns from invading IPC valued islands.)

this tactic sounds devestating, especially if you build men the same round as you unload into africa. the next round you can then move your navy from algeria and the men from eastern us to panama, without building anything. if japan does not repond, you move you navy to sz 54 and place 76ipc worth of navy there in the same round. if they do respond, you just go mediteranean. could you link to a game where you have used this approach?

yeah I guees you’re right the US should buy troops to Wus once they see 5 transports in zone 60, and 10 units in Buriyat, and 10 in japan. But if they do, then I will just keep sending troops to asia instead and the US will have spend 30+ ipc on units that won’t ever get to fight. I see your point though. still I think I will try it out in my next game. if nothing else then just to make the game interesting…

To get 10 units per turn you’re building 8 units in japan plus diverting units from FIC?

In my group we have no purchase limits in capitols.

I usually do have 5 transports shipping units to the mainland by turn 3.

on turn a) I buy 5 inf and 5 arm and drop the same amount of troops off in buryiat.
on turn b) I take the troops from buryiat (5 arm, 5 inf) to western canada, and buy five trans.
on turn c) I take the troops from Japan (5 inf, 5 arm) and move them t w. canada, i move the fleet that dropped off units in w. canada on turn b) back to japan, and i buy another 5 inf and 5 arm.

this means that there will be a japanesse wave of 10 units each turn.

If i have hawaii, all of china and alaska, then the US is down to 35. I would be able to land 10 units at a total value of 40 ipc in w. canada each turn. I don’t see how the US with fewer IPC’s, and while trading central USA, could be able to kick japan out of the continent. They have fewer IPC’s and more territories they need to protect. I am not planning on talking the US by suprise, I am planning on using my infrastructure and superior economy to force the allies out of europe and to move the battle to north america.