Posts made by Commander JayVon

@idk_iam_swiss:

What is truk?

One of the Caroline Islands.

So, there will be an Allied triforce in Africa after all, but what are we looking at here in terms power, one or two infantry?

By ‘ACME’, you mean China being able to only enter limited territories?

Historically, the Russians had one, if not the biggest land armies in the world, but like in all A&A games, this force shall be scaled back, my guess is that A&AE40 will be the same. I can see German setups being a mixed force, infantry, mech-infantry and armor divisions, this force game wise will probably be a bit larger than it historically was, but nothing to actually launch a dedicated attack on the USSR on turn 1, and likewise the Red Bear will be scaled back to not launch, I would assume a war with Germany without a dedicated effort from the get go.

As for East Asia, it depends on three factors: the Russian player, since they do go before Japan, the set up via Amur-Manchuria, and the overall political rules in Global. There seems to be some confusion as to whether or not there will be a standing Non-Aggression Pact between the Soviets and Japanese interpreted in the game, or will it be something else entirely, I’m honestly considering the former will take prominence.

LOL

You guys are hilarious.

Really, link?

A J1 attack prohibition won’t ‘balance’ AAP40, only AAE40 will, when the Allies come at full strength.

In regards to Pacific standalone, there have been several Allied victories reported, the Allies just have to be tightly woven together and perceive strategic realities and eventualities and proceed to counter when opportunity presents itself. Japan eventually overextends itself, she cannot be everywhere at once, the Allies should pick a hole and fill it.

It may sound clique, but this is how I perceive the situation.

@McMan:

DON’T FORGET ABOUT THE ANZAC INFANTRY IN EGYPT!!!

I don’t think they’ll be represented, at least not as ANZAC anyway. Most likely they’ll be grouped as British-Commonwealth, just for the sake of simplicity. However, that doesn’t mean you can’t house rule it per say.  :wink:

Funcioneta, I was under the impression that the Soviet-Japan Nonaggression treaty was in effect for Global, unless broken, like how the process for declarations of war work. At least, thats what I perceived based on what I’ve seen and read, can you show where you heard differently?

You make it seem that immediately after rounds 1 - 3, most Japanese players will attack north, as if within that time the Allies in the south and west are vanquished, the ‘fantasy’ scenario most seem abhor, probably won’t happen for awhile in terms of actual game play. Besides, was it really that much of a fantasy, I remember reading about over two thousand Japanese-Soviet border clashes between the Manchurian-Soviet border over the period of 1939 - 1945. Plus, the Go North movement within the IJA was pretty strong, even during the Navy’s eventual implementation of Southern Advance.

Another thing, whilst the Soviet forces in East Asia seem paltry, it forces Japan to guard Manchuria, and not chain those divisions to crush China. Bringing the Soviets into the war also means that China can actually be liberated by Soviet forces from the west, if their war Germany allows an opportunity to do so.

I can understand that, it is a bit of an oddity, but it would give the Allies a strategic advantage to get units into that area, whether it be Malta, or the Mediterranean in general.

@Brain:

@Admiral:

I guess, and am hoping for something to appear within the end of the month.

I just checked their website and guess what? Nothing as usual.

I have to be somewhat optimistic, they’re finally publicizing WAS: Condition Zebra.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Admiral:

My first assumption is how the starting force of the Italians in Libya and Ethiopia will be represented. Historically, the Italians outnumbered the British, but I don’t think the Italians would be able to take Egypt outright on T1, without a British counterattack or without amassing a force.

Yeah, but the quality was bad, so it may reduce to about equal.

Yes, thats what I’m thinking as well, maybe a total of six Italian infantry in Africa, two placed in Ethiopia, and four in Libya. Or it would be a mixed force, with two or three infantry, one artillery in Libya.  I wouldn’t think there would be any armored units for the Italians, due to their lack of quality historically.

Any ideas of British, or French (since they had colonies their too) set up?

All we can do is wait.

My first assumption is how the starting force of the Italians in Libya and Ethiopia will be represented. Historically, the Italians outnumbered the British, but I don’t think the Italians would be able to take Egypt outright on T1, without a British counterattack or without amassing a force.

Has anyone tried performing a Northern Push strategy whilst keeping a somewhat lighter force in the south, at Queensland, to strike a vulnerable spot within the Philippine-Caroline-Japan defense line?

In most cases alone, the Northern Push forces the Japanese to concentrate its fleet back to sz 6. If combined with feint operations, the Allies could reach the mainland.

Any thoughts?

It’ll be pretty interesting to see how the Soviet presence will change the Pacific. I doubt all eighteen infantry will be left, but I would think most players would leave a substantial force to counter the Japanese, at least ten units, most centered at Amur.

The dynamics are all coming together, folks.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Razor:

US have one job in this game, and that is to take Iwo and Okinava as soon the war is rolling, and this is rewarded with 7 extra IPC because it is what actually happened in the real war. So basically the game mechanic favours this kind of play. So if you wanna win, forget Tommy and go to kill the Tricky Nipper.

Step by step:
Lets assume if Japan move all navy and airforce against India to do a crushing J1 attack, and only defend Japan with the new purchases, then you must:

T1: Move all navy to Hawaii
T2: Move all navy to Iwo Jima and occupie it.
T3: Move tranny with inf/tank to attack Okinava, build an Airbase on Iwo and land a lot of fighters there.
T4: Build Airbase on Okinava and Naval Base on Iwo.
T5: Take Korea.
T6: Build factory in Korea, and by now you propably get my drift, man.

Japan can hit the fleet in Iwo with fleets in Japan, Carolines, and the Philippines

You gotta admit though, its damn well ambitious.

I personally concentrate wolf-packs of American submarines and aircraft, attack any fleet stationed there within that triangle-defensive perimeter, then use the surface American fleet to sweep.

I love the U.S Navy, especially those carriers!

Can’t wait to see the British-Indian pieces vibrantly brought to life.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Admiral:

@Razor:

Malta only need an Airbase. Its 6 freekins islands in the Med, with both air and naval bases on all of them its gonna be freekin crowded, man

I can see your point, and I do sympathize. However, I still envision Malta having a naval base setup, and only for the quick ferrying of British troops in and out of the Mediterranean. If not, I guess that just means the players must make a ‘dedicated push’ as Larry said early.

If the Med is 5 or less spaces wide, a NB on Malta would allow ships near Malta to exit the Med on either side(If they control the appropriate passageway).

Do you necessarily see this as a problem?

@Razor:

Malta only need an Airbase. Its 6 freekins islands in the Med, with both air and naval bases on all of them its gonna be freekin crowded, man

I can see your point, and I do sympathize. However, I still envision Malta having a naval base setup, and only for the quick ferrying of British troops in and out of the Mediterranean. If not, I guess that just means the players must make a ‘dedicated push’ as Larry said early.