ANZAC maneuvers in Java & Brazil

@Idi:

Due to Java’s special political status you can land your fighters in the same turn you activate it.

Is this in the rules?  This is interesting.  This goes for all the Dutch islands I take it.

Activating Brazil is one of my favourite manuevers as ANZAC,  that said, I never thought of sending 2 transports with 1 inf, to collect all of the troops there.

In the past I’ve spent the effort to load them onto an American Transport and get them into Africa.

@Idi:

Due to Java’s special political status you can land your fighters in the same turn you activate it.

I don’t think this is right.  The Dutch territories are like pro-Allied neutrals.  You have to occupy them one round, then you can land planes the next round.

Idi Amin’s right.
Since the Dutch are already at war, its Allies, namely UK and Anzac, can land on its territories without occupying them.

Although if I saw this maneuver as Japan, I’d find it very tempting to send a lot of force to Java on J2, which would cripple Anzac and make Sydney much harder to defend.

Page 34 in the Europe Rule book, under ANZAC
  It may, however move units into Dutch territories as a noncombat movement at any time, as long as those territories have not been captured by an Axis power. It maytake control of Dutch territories by moving land units into them. And gain the IPC value of the territory
  I think thats what Idi Amin is refering to
  Lets get an official ruling

This has come before.  The allies can land aircraft on them even while they are under Dutch control.  They just can’t claim the territory (I.E. plop down a marker and get its income) until they send in a land unit.

Turn 2: Sail your navy to Sz 54

This is the part that scares me.

Sz 54 usually gets whacked J3…  Not many wait for J4.

There are some disclaimers, saying, “Depending on what Japan is Doing”  But if I’m Japan, I’m putting as much air power as possible in positions as to warrant as many options as possible.

@moralecheck:

This has come before.  The allies can land aircraft on them even while they are under Dutch control.  They just can’t claim the territory (I.E. plop down a marker and get its income) until they send in a land unit.

This statement is correct, I’ve seen it in the FAQ thread.

This is amazing. If you go immediately for an ANZAC activated Brazil, you can have two ANZAC infantry in Gibralter or Morocco at the end of turn 3, just in time for America to come across the ocean on turn 4.

If you send both Transports (one purchased on turn 1) you can have 4 units there.

One has to ask, though, what’s the point of that?
Two infantry can’t really do much in the Med, especially if they’re nearly useless on offense - they can combine on defense, but not to attack.
Would those resources be better utilized in the Pacific?

@Alsch91:

One has to ask, though, what’s the point of that?
Two infantry can’t really do much in the Med, especially if they’re nearly useless on offense - they can combine on defense, but not to attack.
Would those resources be better utilized in the Pacific?

I’m with you, I don’t see the logic in spending that much time to get somewhere for minimal effect. I call moves like this gimicky, just because you can doesn’t mean you should.

It is a neat gambit, but if I were the allied player I’d MUCH rather have the USA in control of Brazil with a factory in it, than have ANZAC control it.  The US Brazilian factory is a quick ticket to getting the Axis out of Africa.  Even if ANZAC puts a factory there, they just don’t have the resources to fight in both theatres.

Idi, I totally agree with you.
I was just questioning the logic of trying to put Anzac forces in Africa.  Grabbing Brazil just for the 2 IPCs and some more infantry makes more sense to me.

@moralecheck:

The US Brazilian factory is a quick ticket to getting the Axis out of Africa.

Even though Africa is only 1 turn away from Washington?  What’s the benefit?

The benefit is that Brazil is only one sea zone away.  A transport can Move from Brazil to Africa and offload.  The next turn that same transport can go back to Brazil pick up 2 new units and still make it back to Africa to unload them, so one transport can bring two units to Africa each turn. From Washington it needs one full turn to get there and up to two (depending if there is a friendly naval base) to get back to Washington to get the next load.  One transport needs three to four turns to bring four land unts from Washington.

@moralecheck:

The benefit is that Brazil is only one sea zone away.  A transport can Move from Brazil to Africa and offload.  The next turn that same transport can go back to Brazil pick up 2 new units and still make it back to Africa to unload them, so one transport can bring two units to Africa each turn. From Washington it needs one full turn to get there and up to two (depending if there is a friendly naval base) to get back to Washington to get the next load.  One transport needs three to four turns to bring four land unts from Washington.

Ya but FWA is not a very productive spot to land your units, it will take a few extra turns before they would become useful.

@Idi:

@Young:

@Alsch91:

One has to ask, though, what’s the point of that?
Two infantry can’t really do much in the Med, especially if they’re nearly useless on offense - they can combine on defense, but not to attack.
Would those resources be better utilized in the Pacific?

I’m with you, I don’t see the logic in spending that much time to get somewhere for minimal effect. I call moves like this gimicky, just because you can doesn’t mean you should.

I don’t recall saying anything about taking on the Axis in Europe. The move is simply for ANZAC to activate and retrieve 3 extra inf. as well as earning 2 extra IPC’s for the rest of the game.

Still, if you take 2 transports and 1 infantry ($17) all the way to Brazil for 3 infantry ($9) and bring them all the way back to the Pacific (6 rounds), you will have 2 loaded transports and $2 in extra income. All I’m saying is, ANZAC transports and infantry have one purpose IMO, and that’s to take, liberate, and protect the Dutch islands. A better idea would be for the UK to take it if possible, they need all the units they can get early on.

@ghr2:

@moralecheck:

The benefit is that Brazil is only one sea zone away.�  A transport can Move from Brazil to Africa and offload.�  The next turn that same transport can go back to Brazil pick up 2 new units and still make it back to Africa to unload them, so one transport can bring two units to Africa each turn. From Washington it needs one full turn to get there and up to two (depending if there is a friendly naval base) to get back to Washington to get the next load.�  One transport needs three to four turns to bring four land unts from Washington.

Ya but FWA is not a very productive spot to land your units, it will take a few extra turns before they would become useful.

True.  It is probably a much less useful strategy if the axis has not cracked Egypt.  When I used it the Axis had taken London on turn 3 and had cracked Egypt and were pushing south with the UK unable to stop them.  In this instance FWA was not so bad, especially when every second unit the US landed was a mech or armor.