Topics created by pmelmike

@Omega:

don’t forget the +1 the tac give to Fig. Its a very powerful tool on offensive!

No, it’s the tac receiving the +1. I still prefer a sure def of 4 than a maybe attack of 4. And figs are cheaper while bombers move more. Anyway, no harm having at least one tac just in case

Stacking Bombers on midway is a huge help for an attack against japan. Stacking fighters/tackies on Iwo Jima would be a big help as well. However, I’ve yet to see an allied victory using the “attack japan before UK falls” technique. Scrambling just shreds it.

You said “build land troops in FIC”: is this on J2?  Because you’re not allowed to place a factory in a newly captured territory, correct?  So are you putting the minor IC in Manchuria or Kiangsu (one of the 3 IPC territories)?

you can do like the rest of us and pay $90 for the alpha copy they shipped with the game :)

This link contains EVERYTHING you need to know about triplea, including:
where to download the latest version
where and how to download maps
how to host a game
and more…

http://n2.nabble.com/Download-Maps-Links-Hosting-Games-General-Information-tp4074312p4074312.html

@Uncle_Joe:

Yep, harassing the DEI us the Anzac’s primary mission IMO. Your secondary goal would be to provide ‘kill zones’ around Australia where it would be costly for the Japanese to place their fleet. Subs and land-based air work well for that. This gives the US some safe havens near critical areas from which to attack.

Remember that you dont have to do everything alone with each country. If the Japanese move down towards Australia it might be time for the US to pounce. And often they’ll lose their whole fleet. But if they weaken the Japanese to the point where the Anzac’s can mop-up, it’s worth it. And the sooner the better. Japan has a lot of areas to protect and to do that, she needs a fleet. If you can trade out your own fleets and air for the Japanese ships at even a slightly disadvantageous rate it’s well worth it.

I think it was the biggest leap for us when we came to grips with the fact that in order for the Allies as a whole to win, each individual nation had to make what appeared to be bad moves. The thing here is that Japan can kill anything she wants, but she cant kill everything she wants. So if you put enough out there to pee in Japan’s pool, some of it will go unanswered (or else Japan will stretch quite a bit and risk heavier losses).

I agree with Uncle_Joe’s post above.

We had one game where the Japanese had split up their fleet in the DEI. The US kamikazied their at start fleet into one of them, and then the British did same to the other (4 ftrs, 1 TAC, 1 BB, 1 CA & 1DD - loosing the ships, but not all the planes).

Next game, the Japanese did the same kind of move, but kept their fleet all together. This time the US kamikazied it’s at start fleet + bombers in on it’s turn, loosing everything, but chopping the Japanese down. Then the British attacked with the same force above, and cleaned up the left overs. Potentially, the ANZAC player could have continued attacking on it’s turn had there been the need.

I’m used to the double whammy, but in this game, you can actually get a tripple whammy if you’re smart about it.

Thanks, not really a big deal.

I’m now somewhat curious about the reasons for the “under protection” wording.

Why not just:

Dutch like power whose capital is controlled by enemy
except UK/ANZAC can take control

If UK/ANZAC provokes war, Japan is free to attack the UK/ANZAC and take Dutch territories, without bringing the US into the war.