IPC's

@geocal:

On the previous British turn, the British loaded land units onto American transports in an adjacent sea zone. On its turn, the British conduct an amphibious assault from the American transports in the sea zone during the combat phase.  During the British noncombat movement phase, the British want to load more British land units onto the American transports from an adjacent friendly territory.  The British are using the same American transports both in the combat phase and noncombat phase of the British turn.  Is this allowable?

No it is not. Once the troops are unloaded, further troops cannot be loaded during the same turn:

@rulebook:

… once it offloads, it can’t move, load, or offload again that turn.

@Stumne:

Ok, the US start with 17, once at war with Japan is the 17+30 each turn, or just 30 (not including rest of bonuses)?

Also, and I suppose this applies to all games, does a country not at war at the start of the game, in case of Pacific UK  and ANZAC do they still get IPC, can purchase and move pieces?

Welcome to the forum, Stuart. :-)

Your first question:

@rulebook:

The United States begins the game neutral. It may not declare
war on Japan unless Japan first declares war on it or makes an
unprovoked declaration of war against the United Kingdom or
ANZAC. Following any such unprovoked declaration of war
by Japan, the United States will receive an immediate one-time
bonus payment of 30 IPCs, representing the total mobilization
and transfer of military assets within the continental United
States.

Those 30 are granted at the moment the scenario occurs.

@rulebook:

National Objectives and Bonus Income
…
When the United States Is at War:

30 IPCs if the United States controls Western United
States. Theme: Major shift from peacetime to wartime
economy.
…

So when at war the USA receive +30 IPCs during every US Collect Income Phase.

Your second question:

Actually UK and ANZAC “… are both at war with Japan’s allies, Germany
and Italy, on the other side of the world, so they are not completely neutral.”
(Rulebook, page eight)

When it is their turn, they act as every other power, however they have to respect some restrictions given by the rules:

@same:

When not yet at war with Japan, in addition to
the normal restrictions (see “Powers Not at War with One
Another,” page 14), neither power may move units into or
through China.

HTH :-)

I believe you are correct.  The “bonus” 30 the US gets when it’s attacked early is to compensate for not having extra money while “at war during collect income”, for example:

The US is attacked turn 2, gets 30 IPCs immediately so they have that to spend when it becomes their turn.  If this were NOT the case, then the US would only have their initial 30 IPCs to spend during “war time” which wouldn’t make sense.

This is how I understand it.

@thrumpskin:

Do ipc’s “roll over” like phone phone minutes?

Yes, but more like a bank account.

@MaherC:

what if this is the first game someone buys?   They have 4 US battleships and Japan gets 8 in their box?  Come on.   Anzac has 2 flattops and US gets 4? really?  put some more damn plastic in is all I was saying.  for $90 you should get more pieces than you will ever need (Like how china has 4x the infantry than they will ever need)

Yeah you got my vote.
Presuming everybody has previous editions to fall back on is pretty dumb.

Japan needs to do two things on their third turn if possible (assuming they didn’t fall into taking the bait), they need to take the Philippines and try and take Hawaii if possible.  This will deny the US the most income

Unless the US player is asleep at the wheel I dont see taking Pearl as a viable T3 Japanese goal. I agree that PI must fall on J3, but all the rest of Japan’s power should be pasting the Brits and Chinese. There is little the US can do that early to make any impact on Japan or her econ without risking catastrophic US casualties. Given that, Japan should spend her time and force on overwhelming overkill on the Brits and Chinese. Once they are dead, the game is effectively over unless the US is in serious positions to overturn the Japanese econ (unlikely from what I can see).

I do agree that the Brits have to do everything they can to simply stay alive and force Japan to keep her airpower focused on land. I think that is going to mean investing a in a LOT of troops and maybe AA-guns. A few more of those floating around might give the Japanese pause about throwing 4 Bettys and 4 Zekes/Vals into the fray….

If possible, I think it would be understandable to bait Japan with a DD or an unprotected bomber or something.  As long as the US loses less than 40IPCs in the bait, they are fine cause they will get a net +.

Yes and no. If you can get the Japanese to jump before they are ready then maybe, but once the Japanese kick off, the Brits are going to lose both of their bonuses (assuming they got the 4 island one) and probably half their base econ as well. That goes a long way towards eating into that +40 for the US and frankly, as Japan I’d rather the US had the money than the Brits at that point. My goal as Japan is to keep every Allied IPC OUT of Asia as I possibly can.

This will reduce the combined income of the Allies by 20 IPCs.  Japan should be able to close the Burma road and take Hong Kong too.  Now the Allies have lost 30 IPCs.  Things look very balanced at this point.

Except that Japan still has considerably more disposable combat power on the board as well as FAR FAR FAR superior interior positions and coordination. To me, that is the real killer for the Allies at this point.

I will offer up a rationale for the tac/tank combo. Think about Panzers and Stukas for a moment. The Panzers are used to pin down the enemy in known locations. Then Stukas are sent in to finish off enemy defensive positions before the Panzers blitz the line. If it weren’t for the Panzers pinning the enemy units, they would be harder for the Stukas to hit.

I may be talking out my a$$ though…