Wheatbeer (axis) vs kilroynothere (allies) G40 A3

[wheatbeer]

Italy 4

Buy (28/28)
2 inf
1 art
1 dest
1 fig

CM:

SBR on IRQ
1 strat egy
2 fig sz98

BEL
1 tank bal blitz in and to nov

[wheatbeer]

assuming no intercept since it’s 3 to 1 in a dogfight

IRQ aa fire

Rolls: 1@1; Total Hits: 01@1: (4)

[wheatbeer]

IRQ bomber roll

Rolling 1d6:
(4)

[wheatbeer]

bel twol

NCM:
2 fig, 1 strat irq >> egy
3 trans, 1 dest, 1 cru, 1 dest sz98 >> sz95
1 sub sz95 >> sz98

Mobilize:
2 inf, 1 art nita
1 dest sz95
1 fig sita

Collect 17 + 10 = 27 IPC

kilroy vs wheat a3 g2 4gItaly.AAM

[wheatbeer]

Germany 5

Buy (60/60)
8 inf
4 art
2 fig

CM:

NUKR
1 inf epl
1 fig wgr
1 tact bes

SUKR
1 mech, 1 tact bes
2 strat sita

ARCH
1 fig, 2 tact epl
1 art nov

[wheatbeer]

NUKR

A auto
D 1 inf

Rolls: 1@2; Total Hits: 01@2: (5)

SUKR

A auto
D 2 inf

Rolls: 1@4; Total Hits: 11@4: (4)

ARCH

A auto
D 2 inf

Rolls: 1@4; Total Hits: 11@4: (2)

[wheatbeer]

nukr twol

sukr cwlo 1 mech
arch cwlo 1 art

[wheatbeer]

convoy roll sz105

Rolls: 2@3; Total Hits: 22@3: (3, 3)

[wheatbeer]

NCM:
1 dest sz113 >> sz110
1 cru, 1 carrier sz113 >> sz115
1 tact arch >> nov
1 tact arch >> bel
2 fig sita >> wgr
1 fig egy >> sita
1 tact, 2 strat sukr >> bel
1 fig arch >> bel
1 fig nukr >> epl
1 tact nukr >> bes
1 aa nita load trans sz95
13 inf, 5 art nov >> bel
22 inf, 9 art, 7 tank, 3 aa epl >> bel
1 inf epl >> bes
2 tank bes >> bel
1 inf, 3 art pol >> epl
3 trans sz115 >> sz114 load 5 inf, 1 art ger >> sz115 unload nov
2 inf, 1 art fin >> vyb
2 inf, 1 art fra >> wgr
3 art wgr >> ger

Mobilize:
3 art nov
2 inf, 1 art fin
3 inf ger
3 inf, 2 fig wgr

Collect 48 + 10 - 2 = 56 IPC

(skipped ANZAC/France as usual)

kilroy vs wheat a3 g2 5aGermany.AAM

[wheatbeer]

By the way, just to prevent a possible issue.  You intended to land on DGU even though the US can’t claim DGU?

You didn’t place a flag (which would be accurate based on the rules about the Dutch), but it seemed a little weird to land there.

[kilroynothere]

Yes, a bit strange, but…. it gives ANZAC a +5NO, unless I’m mistaken. If I’m mistaken, then I’d do something else. the NO indicates “allies” and that includes US, so figured it worked.

[wheatbeer]

DGU remains under Dutch control if the US lands there.  The US cannot take any Dutch territories unless they are recapturing it from Japan.  The ANZAC NO isn’t met currently as a result.  I don’t mind if you do something else with those units since it wouldn’t influence the other Axis powers.

[wheatbeer]

Alternatively, we could play ignoring that rule.  I don’t understand entirely why the US isn’t the same as ANZAC/UK with regards to the Dutch.

[kilroynothere]

I was writing this when you replied…

Really?  Didn’t know that. Has that been clarified with Krieg or others?  It’s just noted in the original rules (and boy have those needed some clarifications) that only UK or ANZAC can control PRIOR to being at war with Japan. Figured not an issue after being at war because technically the Dutch are at war as well with Japan.

So, can ANZAC take control of the territory?

I’ve never actually done the move before, so just curious.

I’ll ask in the QA area, but if you have seen it, please let me know.

… I’m cool with ignoring, because I don’t understand it, but there MUST be a reason if that is the rule. I really do think, even with all the game testing changes, that the designers have firm reasons for what they are doing. This is a VERY tough game to balance and to design.

[wheatbeer]

see page 65 of the Global FAQ (Krieghund, post 963)

This was a rule in the original Pacific and hasn’t changed since.

[wheatbeer]

And yes, ANZAC (or UK) can still take it through NCM.  I don’t know if Russia or France would theoretically be allowed to NCM control them, but the US isn’t supposed to.

This applies to all the Dutch territories (JAV, SUM, CEL, DGU, and Surinam).

This doesn’t come up to often.

[kilroynothere]

Very strange… I suppose that is primarily historical… US NOT wanting to do such a thing at all. Seems strange, but that is the rules, so let’s play by them. I’ll revise my little strategy (bummer) during the French and ANZAC turn.

And, on your thoughts about the game. I sorta agree, but it sure feels like Germany has the upper hand against Russia (will fall soon enough - but painful), and Japan is just so damn strong with it’s navy.

Allies are very hard to play in my estimation. I haven’t studied what other do, but I find it hard. I think I’m getting better, but just not there yet with a strategy. You have adapted well to all of my little ploys so far.

Been a great game so far!  Oh, took a peek at your game against Jerc… now that is a crazy game!

[wheatbeer]

Just in case you missed it because I posted twice and it shifted to the next page:
page 65 of the Global FAQ will confirm it

Maybe the idea was to stop early naval or air bases in the area.

Allies are hard to play no doubt (they are easier with the newest setup though).

My match against Jercules is kinda weird.  I thought I was dead because Japan was badly convoy raided for many turns and was expelled from China through US/Soviet cooperation.  But the European Axis are probably strong enough to hold off even 100% US focus now.

[wheatbeer]

I do like Germany’s position in our game … Baltic transports seem to be a better investment than a Romanian major IC.  But you have a lot of UK fire power in the Middle East and Africa, plus naval support.  My hope is that Britain can’t both save Russia and fight Italy.

[kilroynothere]

Agreed. I just started a new game with Questioneer and playing the Axis. The initial set up is much more daunting now. Probably a good change as it definitely seemed ever so slightly Axis skewed.

And you are dead on with the UK… can’t fight Italy AND save Russia… Definitely like the tt purchases more than the MjrIC. Gives a bunch more flexibility and options.