Posts made by Witt

Does it not mean you cannot move from one hostile sea zone to another and pick up  in the 2nd one? Can only load in the sea zone the transport starts in.

Thanks. That is how I always played it. Means if I attack Amur on J1, I am fighting a worthless battle (IPC wise) for the 1st half of any game, while UK/Anzac are getting wealthier. It is either that or ignore them and prepare for a J2 DOW, always looking worriedly over my shoulder.

I always find whatever I do as Japan the Allies are at my heels at the other flank. Cannot be everywhere. I hate going south for the income and for  India leaving China to slowly, but surely regain Asia and I really hate leaving those 18 Russians on my northern border. Attacking them now means I have to kill 24 of them, but leaving them means they will attack when I am stretched everywhere else ( maybe around T4)losing  me 6 IPCs and then facing enemies on 2 fronts and a probable minor US factory. I have never won Global as Japan and am resigning myself to being Germany’ s holding partner. but is just so hard not being aggressive and enjoying Japan’ s very strong set up.

Obviously only in Global, but in oct 2011 alpha3 says if Japan attacks  any Russian territory bordering Mongolia the 6 Inf are placed  at the end of Japan’ s go and controlled by them. Sounds like Mongolia is an exception to the Allied friendly rule because their territory does not need to be attacked for their Inf to be placed in their borders.  My question is still: can Russia move them out on their next turn without first moving into Mongolia to activate them?

So Russia could attack Japanese troops outside of Mongolia using these 6 Inf or move in to china to defend?

Can you confirm Mongolian Inf (represented by Russian ones) like all other attacked neutrals cannot leave their own borders? Thank you. I presumed they could be used to bolster Russian defences, then read neutrals could not leave their country when activated. On J1 I like to attack Amur, so if they cannot move out I am happier!

Seems ok, except I do bonuses 2nd and convoy last. Think convoy counting can be hard and involves dice rolling.

People complain the Axis have the advantage in Global. ( I do not agree.) Allowing Japan to vacate Manchuria and Korea in Pacific gives them 12 more ground units to overwhelm China. (This is an advantage.)I am playing this weekend and have decided to leave 4 behind, but my position still looks very strong. Maybe I will leave 6 behind.

I agree. 25 years ago my Axis plan was always to eliminate Russia using Japanese help from the East. Once Russia  goes the Axis are undoubtably more than half way there. Buying Inf as the Russians and buying time is your best bet. The introduction of Italy, however, has changed things. Taking the war to the Med and knocking out Italy helps the allies tremendously and as the Axis I am always worried about my weaker Southern neighbour.

Pity. Sounded good in my head. I like the idea that despite a country’s surrender there are always some that will find a way to prolong the struggle, but I understand you do not want to complicate things too much. I am sure the A&A community must be like the whole of Italy when it comes to football: 50 mlllion wannabe managers all better than the appointed professional.

I am sure this will be cleared up in the 2nd edition. For now I have got my Allied opponents to agree to my leaving 3 of the 7 Japanese Inf as a garrison. Leaves me 4 ground units for Chinese adventures. Since Europe and Global  were added I  have been unhappy with emptying Manchuria of ground units.

Could the line be:“Attack Axis units or move in during non combat”? Please. Not “occupy”, as that confused me. Thought Chinese could only enter to attack and evict the Japanese.

I think it was to leave that as an option later on. Wouldn’t it be cool if after a successful capture of London and surrender of IPCs , Canada could build 7 IPC worth of units a turn? Then soon as UK was liberated, UK would continue to collect Canada’s income again. I think it would make sense.

Will try selling that to my opponents. Thank you.

Thank you. I had read that some players did that. Whether French or Anzac still  means they cannot attack with UK, only defend.Had  Wondered if  some players just used the 3 UK units and this was why I was struggling with Italy. Had hoped this was not the case.

I really would like to know what people think. Does everyone only place the 3 UK ground units in Egypt?

I did not post as I usually play Pacific or Europe, not Global. You can see when one side has lost and stop before victory conditions are met. Then play all over again!
Not a bad thread title. Any thoughts on my Anzac one?

Thank you. Had not seen that and was unhappy to contradict Kriegkund, but could not see any difference with what I had said. Now I realise without a japanese DOW against UK/Anzac a Japanese player could have moved through an occupied sea hex on its way to a Dutch territory. Now it cannot. Though, of course, my way and knowing I was provoking war with UK/Anzac, I would have attacked them too and, therefore, not moved illegally through a sea zone . You have to love Japan.

Who doesn’t dream of a second Roman empire? I know Italy will be eliminated, but love the highs and hopes of everlasting glory. Have lost Rome when Italy is doing well too! All good fun.

Japan can take any Dutch territories, without first declaring war, but
UK, Anzac and US see this as provocation and brings all 3 to war in their next turn.