Posts made by ChocolatePancake

Well, you’re thinking about it sort of in the wrong way. You aren’t applying the die roll to the territories next to the sea zone, you are applying the die rolls to the sea zone itself, representing shipping passing through that sea zone, and the maximum value you can disrupt is the value of the territories next to the sea zone.

@Zhukov44:

There is no perfect USA1 buy.  It always depends on what Axis is doing.

This is such a cop out answer. Of course it depends on what the Axis are doing, but that’s the whole point of the question. Give some typical scenarios and how you would counter them with your USA builds.

Yeah, they did. The game sort of models this with the convoy raid zone on the west coast of England.

Only a DOW is a DOW. You can’t convoy raid if you aren’t at war. The german sub can sit off the east coast of the USA all he wants and it will not have any effect until the USA and Germany are at war.

@ghr2:

People keep saying, u can divide a single convoy dice between 2 countries.  Basically, a lone destroyer can convoy 2 from egypt, and 1 from TJ if it rolls a 3.  I was under the impression that this is not possible.

Yeah, since both those sea zones border the convoy zone, you can raid the UK for all three IPCs. I agree it’s a little quirky when you only have one destroyer doing the raiding, but it would still have to be a fairly lucky roll.

Yeah, I usually take Brazil with USA, sometimes UK. I’ve done it with the Anzac before, but generally it’s much more valuable to have the Anzac transports continually contesting the money islands.

Anzac planes can be useful as a can opener in the med, but is not strictly necessary, as the allies already have the french fighter right there which serves the same purpose.

Eh, I disagree,  the Kamikazes are far from useless. If you’re smart and keep your fleet mostly in Kamikaze zones like the Philippines, it often scares the allies off from attacking until/unless they have overwhelming force (which if they have, you’ve probably already lost in the Pacific anyways). It’s a lot harder to defeat a Japanese fleet containing a bunch of loaded carriers and destroyers with just air + subs. Basically, they’re highly useful as a deterrent.

I’m having difficulty imagining a scenario where being able to purchasing them for offensive purposes wouldn’t be either completely overpowered or totally pointless, but that’s really a discussion for house rules.

I would definitely give an early Persia factory a try. From Persia you can purchase 3 more fast movers, which combined with the South Africa factory makes holding Egypt much easier.
Also from Persia, I’ve had some success skirmishing with the Germans in the Caucasus and even Stalingrad sometimes. A factory there makes it much more difficult for Germany to hold those two critical territories, and fighters purchased there can move directly to Moscow next turn to reinforce it.
It also makes it much easier to try and reclaim India if you want to go that route.

Of course, the downside to this approach is that the UK generally ends up spending less on naval units, making the allied fleet less dangerous in the Atlantic.

There’s a few reasons why you want to capture India. First, it’s a 5 IPC bonus every round, which is very nice. Second, it threatens the middle east, which can force the UK to respond and possibly take away some resources which would otherwise be defending Moscow.
Finally, and most importantly I think, it allows you to move all of your air and naval assets east to immediately start threatening a win by capturing Sydney or Hawaii. It allows you to build almost exclusively with this goal in mind as well. Thus, either the USA will spend a large amount of resources stopping you, and hopefully allowing Germany to get the win, or Japan will just win outright.

Just a quick note, if you do decide as Japan to attack Amur, do not attack any part of Mongolia at the same time. Doing so counts as attacking a neutral country and will activate the neutrals for the allies.

Pretty sure that is incorrect YG. Attacker has the option of retreating after any round of combat whether or not there are only transports left.
For example, if you go into a round of combat with 1 destroyer and 2 loaded transports and take 2 casualties, you would lose the destroyer and 1 transport. The other transport could then retreat to a valid sea zone, and yes, the units on board the transport are indeed stuck there and cannot unload that turn.

Undefended transports only get auto-destroyed when defending, and that is only to speed up combat so that you don’t have to keep rolling dice when the outcome is assured.

That’s right, you can be at war with France all you want, but attacking French Indo-China, even a failed attack or an attack against just some British units, even if it’s just planes, counts as an attack.

Well, technically it’s possible if Russia and Great Britain are cooperating with you to get the 8 victory cities by T5, but if the allies put up even the most incompetent of defenses, it’s impossible.

Yeah, the main problem I see with this strategy is it doesn’t matter if the Allies capture Tokyo first. The Allies win condition is to capture all 3 Axis capitols, and the Axis can still win on the Europe half if Tokyo is in Allied hands.

So, it doesn’t really matter if it takes Germany a turn or two after Japan falls to take Egypt.

I’ve done this strategy before, took London and Calcutta turn 3, and what ItIsILeClerc said is exactly what happened. Germany got into a stalemate with Russia, and Japan got slowly overwhelmed by the USA.

In the past, as I recall, we’ve always just done it where you take the bomber out of the battle. Then if the battle hasn’t started yet, the attacker decides if he wants to call off the attack or continue without the bomber.  If there have already been rounds of combat that have been rolled, the defender gets to choose whether or not to re-rolls the round(s) of combat that have already occurred. If the defender decides to re-roll, then the attacker would get the chance to call off the attack. We would never let the bomber go help another battle that turn, or redo any other battles that had already occurred.

This is generally the most fair way of doing things, but there are always special circumstances that can happen and in that case you just negotiate with the other player until you come to a fair agreement. If you can’t come to an agreement about a fair way to resolve the mistake then you probably shouldn’t continue the game anyway.

Ah, true, if they are loaded during the combat phase then yeah, they both have to unload. Missed that part of his question.

They don’t have to all unload, but any units that don’t unload are stuck on the transport until the next turn.

Also, don’t forget that the USA had the nuclear option.
If the war in Europe kept on grinding, then I bet the allies would have eventually nuked Germany out of existence.
With the overwhelming air and naval advantage the allies had, Germany would have had no chance.

1. You roll them separate. The attacker declares which bombers are bombing what, and then each set of bombers is rolled individually.
2. Yes, they are both mandatory.

As a side note, if Germany doesn’t want to convoy raid the UK, then Germany should move the sub somewhere else. That would prevent that issue from occurring.
As another side note, I have seen a Germany player once intentionally leave the SZ 125 empty of warships the turn before taking Moscow, just to get that extra $5.