us marines - how do they work?

[sala33]

i don't understand the difference betweeen infantry and us marines.

what is their attack value in amphibious attacks? and what if they have a matching artillery? do they still attack at 1 when the move from one land territory to another?

[Krieghund]

US Marines attack on a 2 whenever they are attacking in an amphibious assault.  This is true even if they came in from a land territory rather than by ship.  If any unit involved in the battle came in by transport, the battle is considered an amphibious assault, so all attacking marines attack on a 2.  Any Marines paired with artillery attack on a 3 under these conditions.

Other than that, they are treated the same as regular infantry.  So, in a non-amphibious attack they would hit on a 1, or on a 2 if paired with artillery.

[saburo sakai]

The only think I would add to Krieghund's excellent response is that US Marines always defend on a 2, even if the Japanese are attacking by way of amphibious assault.  Therefore, the Marines on Guam and Wake Island always defend on a 2 and do not get any defensive bonus because they are Marines.

SS

[dinosaur]

I can't figure one thing out.  If marines cost 4 IPC, and artillery cost 4 IPC, isn't the artillery buy always a better deal?  The only scenario I can see marines being helpful if when making an amphib assault, because you can't carry 2 artillery on one transport, so 1 marine and one artillery would give you the biggest punch.  But it still appears to me artillery are much more helpful.  Am I missing something?

[frimmel]

Nope. Not missing anything. In Pacific you don't really ever have US combats that are not amphib assaults and you really have to be able to load your TRNs to capacity. The US is far from the action.  Marines make a difference.

[dinosaur]

Thanks.  I just wanted to make sure I was on top of it.  My son and I are working through our first game.

I guess I can see with the huge income of the US that they should be willing to get that extra punch.

I had not read the essay on KIF so we are just playing by the seat of our pants.  Japan really did run wild on their first turn, and I am wondering how effective they will be on turn 2 w/o the defend on a 1 advantage.  We have a large US force on Hawaii at the end of turn 1 so it will be interesting to see how Japan handles that.  In the current situation (board is not here where I can see it) I think 2 Japanese fleets may be able to reach Hawaii.  My thinking is that they can't afford to do this attack because they can't afford the losses even if they did come out numerically ahead in IPCs.

[timerover51]

For Japan to concentrate on Hawaii is the best thing that can happen for the Allies.

[frimmel]

In the current situation (board is not here where I can see it) I think 2 Japanese fleets may be able to reach Hawaii.  My thinking is that they can't afford to do this attack because they can't afford the losses even if they did come out numerically ahead in IPCs.

After turn one Japan has to concentrate on consolidation and maybe picking off straggling Allies units. Japan can afford no signifigant losses of material.