I too have been thinking about this.  What about a casualty evacuation system that removes the dead from the battlefield.  One infantry unit could move another away from contact towards the rear.  A vehicle (good job for the new trucks) could then speed the dead units to the rear where points are gained for succesful evacuation.

Well that might work the best.  You don't save the soldier but you get points for battlefield triage (not sure about the spelling on that one).

If I bought a second IC with Japan, in a KJF game, it would be in Manchuria where it can be easily supported.  Maybe Kwangtung.

And while 4 IPC (+4 Japan, -4 USA) may not sound like much, remember that every one counts.  Also, Japan can easily increase their defensive power significantly with a single Aircraft Carrier purchase. (6 Fighters at sea instead of 4.)

But also keep in mind, the idea is to SLOW America down, not to STOP America.  You just want to make America hesitate long enough to break Russia.

Kwangtung would be the better place.  I say that b/c that is a VT.  If you need troops massed quickly to defend it why not have them home grown.

The Allies always have more IPC's then the Axis.  In revised Germany is the second largest IPC country and Japan is tied for third with the UK.  So as far as the Axis being at a loss is normal.

Also since most of the time we play 1 vs. 1 I think I will use Italy as a homeland security force to defend W Europe from a foothold invasion.  Then Germany can focus on the Russia and / or Africa.

LT

I guess I could see why every one says buy 3 transports your first turn instead of an IC.  If they are going after Germany first Japan might want to put thier mainland IC in India since they would be on the advance.  But if they need to defend they would want it closer to be able to reach it better.

Hmmm... How profound, yet simple.

Manchuria would be best then Japan would only need to defend two SZ's then (The ones that border Japan proper.)

  You absolutely dont want to build island ICs that you now have to defend against a building US navy.

   Also, Why do we give Asia to UK and Russia? Thats a big mistake. I would still land grab normally in Asia. The difference i would make is, instead of buuilding an IC in India, I would build it in a defendable position, like manchuria.

What about FIC?  It's still 1 transport move away and gives you a wider base w/o sacrificing Japan's ability to reach it.

LT

What's really the point of buying an IC in the islands? Sure it's safe from attack, but here's the problems of an island build:...

2. You only can place 1 unit on that place. If you're Japan, you need somewhere where you can mobilize more units at one time...

That's why I suggested  E. Indies, Borneo or Philippines. They all get a 3 or 4 build.

1942 scenario ( I read the Japanese player chart):

1. Japan
2. Soviet Union
3. Germany
4. UK
5. Italy
6. US

Does the US play China at the same time?  (Also 6th in line)

With this new bomber rule I think I may bring back the old Paratrooper house rule.  I only say that b/c I may buy bombers now.

LT

On second thoughts, bomber looks a little bit more like 13 in cost and battleship as 20. Can someone at GENCON clarify this. This would be:

Mobilization zone (Cost, move, attack, defend:

Infantry   3/1/1/2
Artillery   4/1/2/2
Tank          5/2/3/3
AA-gun        5/1/-/1
IC            15/-/-/-

Fighter         10/4/3/4
Bomber       13/6/4/1

Submarine   6/2/2/2
Transport   7/2/-/-
Destroyer   8/2/2/2
Cruiser       12/2/3/3
Carrier        14/2/1/2
Battleship   20/2/4/4

wow! this is turning into the S&P 500. I also ask for clarification on these values. Can somebody let us know the true values please?

subs at 6 IPC! OMFG!

I guess im gonna buy lots of subs and bombers with a few cruisers. MUhahhahahah!

Well with subs at 6IPC's who whould want to use those expensive transports as fodder?

I thought S Africa would be better b/c in the off chance Italy can sit at the big kid table and contribute to the game that would be some thing they could do b/c they wouldn't have as far to go as any of the allies.

Italy does sit at the big kid table...

Of course, its so Germany and Japan can have Italy get beer, soda and sandwitches. And no one wants to scream across to the kids table, so it's better to make sure Italy is close by.

Oh I get it It's the Thor and Skippy strategy.  Thor is the Axis suprime commander and like you said Skippy gives Thor foot rubs so Thor doesn't hit Skippy.

Japan starts out with a major fleet advantage VS the US. Make sure you buy some fleet every turn, while still buying some land units (50/50 split might work), and you'll find that US will be unable to make a viable push into the Pac until US5 or US6 or so.

By that time, Germany have made headway vs Russia.

DON'T bother adding units to the Islands! That has to be one of the worse moves possible in A&A. In the line of buying navy with Russia 

My logic for that was when the US does get around to the pacific they island hop.  The UK and Russia take mainland Asia.  This leaves Japan with Japan proper and only 8 IPC's.

Would you consider buying a second IC on one of those island to have two points to drop ships into the water?

I thought S Africa would be better b/c in the off chance Italy can sit at the big kid table and contribute to the game that would be some thing they could do b/c they wouldn't have as far to go as any of the allies.

I was thinking with a KJF game Japan could do 1 of 2 strategies.

1) buy FTR's and BMR's.  They can out maneuver the US navy and defend islands before they can get to them. They can also run strafe attacks.  1 for 1 Japan would do to bad. Yeah the US may choose to loose subs (10 IPC FTR vs 8 IPC SUB) but then the next cheapest navy unit would be other FTR's.  (I took Transports out of the running b/c they should have units on board.  This would bring the value up from 8 to a min. of 14 with 2 INF)

2) build IC's on principal islands (E. Indies, Borneo or Philippines) and mass INF. until Germany can do a partial Canadian Shield.

LT

[Ottawa]

VCs added are: Ottawa, Warsaw, Stalingrad, Hong-kong, Sydney and Honolulu.

Bah, I really was hoping they would stop putting in North American VCs since those will rarely see play.  Oh well..

Yeah I would have liked S. Africa better then Ottawa.

Do you bother with Australia? 

Do you put a couple of extra INF on E. Indies, Borneo or Philippines?  Or do you Hail Marry it and dump FTR's on those islands when the US gets in range?

LT