Posts made by Navymule

@P@nther:

Actually the National Objectives are UK’s NOs and neither UK-Europe’s nor UK-Pacific’s NOs.

But they put money into one or the other’s economy exclusively, right?  I get what you’re saying though.  Thanks for the confirmation.

Thanks for the great tips.  I suppose I will just continue to live and learn with decals.  I bought an entire box of Exacto blades specifically for this task.  It’s just so….not fun.  But the results are.

Based upon recommendations here, I will move to spray on primer.  Thanks again!

I understand that West India counts toward UK-Pacific’s IPC count.  Does that also mean that it does not count toward UK-Europe’s NO?  Came up in our game this weekend.  The confusion being the fact that West India is on the Europe half of the map.  We decided it did not.  Is that the correct decision?

I’ve started to paint our G40 pieces.  It’s my first time painting miniatures or models. I began with some surface ships, the UK combat ships specifically.  I learned right away that a good coat of primer is paramount. I finished my UK and ANZAC fleets.  Nothing fancy, no camo schemes or anything.

I then moved on to one Zero, one Val, a Panther and a B29. I’m happy with how the tank turned out. I feel the Japanese aircraft probably should have another coat or two of white before I added the secondary colors. And as for the Superfortress, well, silver was the only color that wasn’t a flat that I had.

• My questions to the experienced/better painters: what specific brand of primer do you use? I’m using the Vallejo grey acrylic primer and it doesn’t go on all that well (in my limited experience).
• Do any of you use an airbrush? I’ve been painting by had so far, but have already begun to wonder if a quality airbrush might be better.
• Does applying decals get any better?  I swear that is the worst part of the entire process.  They absolutely add to the sculpts, but cutting to size and getting them on just right is a huge PITA.
• Is there a better brand of paint than Vallejo?  I’m ok with using them so far, but before I really invest into this I’d like to know if there is something better out there.

Cheers!

$11.95 US for shipping?  And am I correct that PayPal is the only payment option?  Am I missing something from the website?

We have a permanent table and play quite regularly on Whidbey Island. Where in Washington are you located?

The only territory available to Japan to construct a Major IC would be Korea.  Any others would need to be a minor.

@The:

@Caesar:

It shouldn’t be allowed in my opinion because if UK is shielding a combatant while neutral, it would be an act of war legally. Japan goes to war when UK enters Chinese territory but suddenly it’s okay for the Tigers to enter neutral UK.

Though this move may seem a bit dodgy, there is historical precedent: The US occupied Iceland in July 1941, American destroyers escorted convoys bound for Britain (which resulted in the USS Reuben James being sunk off Iceland by U-552 that October), US military pilots “resigned their commissions” to join the Flying Tigers and RAF Eagle Squadron and so on, all prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor. In fact, the P-40s flown by the Tigers were originally shipped from the US to Burma in the spring of '41, assembled there, then flown to China.

If you dig deep enough, I think you’ll find that neutrality in WWII was situational, at best; at worst, a mutually-agreed-upon fiction. I’d classify this rule as “strange, but historically accurate.”

This is also exemplified by the “Destroyers for bases” agreement between UK and US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroyers_for_Bases_Agreement.  Hearts of Iron IV does a good job of including this in the game play.

A bigger question here would be:  why are the carriers moving into the hostile sea zone during the combat movement phase?  The kamikazes can only be used during that phase.  So use the aircraft during combat, then during the non-combat movement phase, move the carriers into the zone.  Carriers should rarely, if ever, be victim of kamikaze attacks in this game.

I had something like this in our game over the weekend.  Germany captured France, but only one ground unit survived the combat.  I wasn’t trying to do anything tricky, just had a bad case of getting diced.  UK then reinforced both France (with A/C) and Normandy (with ground units via the transport that survived from 109).  To complicate matters, I also attacked Russia G1.  After three turns I finally solidified my hold on Western Europe, but by that time my attack into Russia had petered out.

It was no fun.  No fun at all.  If that happens to you, best to seek best terms available at peace talks.  8-)

This underscores the tactic of always sending a sub after a lone, loaded carrier when there is not a friendly airfield in that zone.  It is always worth the risk/cost of losing the sub. Damaging the carrier costs the defender two aircraft.

For those who have used the YG/Intrepid custom map file, I have a question.  Is there a limit as to how large a map this file can be stretched?  I know it is intended for 72x33, but how much resolution is lost going larger? Is it still usable at 80x36?  Somewhere in between?

I would also like to know how well this image scales up.  Maybe not quite as large as carsonbparker mentions, but perhaps 80x36 or something similar.

I live in Oak Harbor (on Whidbey Island).  We have a group that plays G40 most Saturdays.  Let me know if you’re interested.

We have a regular game group that plays most Saturdays at my place.  We have a permanent game table setup for A&A G40.  Currently have three members and looking to add more.

Oak Harbor, WA
on Whidbey Island

We have several different A&A games but focus primarily on G40.

Thank you!  That makes such a huge difference for the Axis in the early game.

Our house group plays 2nd Edition rules.  We have playing under the assumption that for combined arms to be in effect, the two units must originate from the same territory.  However, I was watching a G40 strategy video and the maker was using combined arms even though the units did not originate from the same territory.

An example would be on G1, Germany used the fighter from Holland and the tactical from West Germany.  Does the tactical benefit from combined arms in this case?

Obviously(?), a mech infantry must begin its movement in the same territory as a tank to benefit from blitzing, right?

Are we playing this correctly or not?  :?

So I see you guys laughing.  Maybe I’m missing something.  Even with a J1 attack and grabbing two of the money islands, Japan is making 44 IPC’s.  USA, first turn, collects 72.  No way Japan keeps up with the American navy.  So how does Japan defend?  Actual question.

I opened with Grasshopper’s J1 opener, including a minor on Mainland China.  Looking to pressure China/India while grabbing money islands.  New Zealand builds subs just to harass Japanese transports.

If Japan builds navy defensively, India is never properly threatened.  If Japanese aircraft are used defensively, China never gets properly knocked back.  On top of this, Russia threatens Korea and provides a nice landing spot for US strategic bombers.

I may not be a A&A hero like many of you, so I’m looking for an actual strat to combat this.

Not having issues in Europe.  Would simply like to keep Japan viable past turn 5.

My regular opponent has come up with something new (in our games) while playing Allies:  he builds a minor and seaport in Alaska.  This puts him one turn from SZ 6 / mainland Japan.  Defending against KJF is difficult enough, but this has me completely flummoxed.  Any suggestions as to what I might do?

I will say that Germany and Italy are making hay in Europe while the Allies KJF, but not enough to compensate for Japan being neutralized by turn 5 or so.

Playing our weekly game yesterday and a few things came up that we would like clarified by the experts (or at least the folks here  :-D).

1. I was playing as Japan.  US player had a large force in SZ 6, including loaded transports (that they moved in during the NC phase of previous turn). During his combat movement phase, he takes a lone, loaded transport and conducts an amphibious assualt into SZ 19, attacking Kiangsu.  I had no ships in SZ 19.  According to the Pacific rule book, I cannot target transports with kamikaze attacks.  He then moves surface ships into the zone to protect the transport on his NC move, again negating any possible kamikaze attack.  Is this intended, or a manipulation of the rules?  It seems as though kamikazes will never be able to defend against amphib assault, nor attack carriers (since they typically follow a/c into a SZ on NC phase).  Do most people simply house rule this, or what?  If they are only good against destroyers, cruisers and BB’s, I feel they are rather useless, particularly when the USN attacks in force.

2. As Germany, I had a lone transport in SZ 113.  I also had a stack of fighter a/c in Western Germany.  My UK opponent sent a strategic bomber to attack my lone transport and I scrambled three fighters to defend.  During the ensuing battle, if the bomber scores a hit, I can choose to assign that hit to a fighter if I so desire, correct?  I could choose to not lose the transport at all, right?

3. Finally, Italy is conducting amphib assault into Trans Jordan from SZ 98.  UK has an airfield in Egypt, but no ships in the Med.  UK scrambles to defend against the assault.  Does this negate any shore bombardment that may accompany the Italian assault?

Thanks ahead of time.