Can a damaged battleship still attack? -AAG40

@akreider2 said in China: attacking with infantry 3 vs 1:

For me, I’m interested in the scenario where Japan has relatively unlimited resources to crush you (in terms of planes) and a handful of infantry. So you are balancing your goal of maximizing the probability that you will kill that one infantry, versus preserving your infantry for the 2-4 turns that China can expect to live by retreating.

This is typically in the first 4 rounds of the game when China is retreating/generally getting crushed.

Would hit with 2 then, but again it depends on what else Japan has to hit. Their resources are not always unlimited (e.g., Russians, British, Americans in play)

Italian canopening is even more effective when combined with the Germany “Dark Skies” option with lots of bombers.  The tanks+mechs+bomber attack options means that the Allies cannot place moderate-sized stacks within two spaces of the German/Italian main stack.  Russia ends up cowering in Moscow with a few minor exchanges each round.  UK ends up with a strong stack near Iraq, never daring to move it too close to the Germans.

Meanwhile the huge range of the German bombers give that power flexibility to find opportunistic attacks:
*Allied ground forces in W. Europe
*Allied ships in the Atlantic
*Allied ships in the Med
*Push into Siberia
*Mid-game Sealion or Egypt attack

I am not saying that this plan guarantees victory, but it allows League players to aim towards eventual victory in G13-17.  Most face-to-face games end up with a Moscow attack on G5-8 when the Axis players just decide that the numbers look close enough.  With the battlecaculator and more time on PBEM/PBF games, Germany can comb through the options every turn and patiently wait for the right opening with a big TUV swing.

Inf + tank, for the reasons mentioned. Plus, that combo actually has a slightly better chance of killing the defender in the first round, though the difference is small.

never say never in the world of Axis and Allies.  I’m pretty sure I’ve found a way, but as stated, has enough drawbacks of its own.  I could show you in a friendly game.  8-)

One reason to use them on land would be to take FRA, WFR, and SFR all at once … but it probably doesn’t outweigh the strategic advantage of sinking an extra SZ of Allied ships.

Though you have me thinking now about how many land units you can safely free up (i.e. start moving toward Russia early) by using significant air over Paris and how much difference that would make against the USSR.  This would only make sense if you only do Sea Lion opportunistically and you plan an early Barbarossa.

The warship and transport need only end their movement in the same sea zone.  They don’t have to move together.

Clearly ShadowHAwk does not understand what I am talking about.

1. Attacker has only subs
2. Defender has destroyer and subs

In this case defending subs fire first and any hits are assigned to attacking subs. The attacking subs who are hit do not fire back! hence the term surprise defence!

To my knowledge this is the only situation where  the defending side roll dice before attacker!

@anderb:

attackung true neutrals is plain stupid. best way to lose a game.

:-D

mine was only a question of “if I were to attack as I do …” neutral attack is inconvenient for both sides, especially because the axis has no men to cover additional fronts … this is clear.