I get why people hate this version. It’s a weird theme to play for a serious conception of a game however what I do like about Zombies is that you can have a 100% plan and it can lost because of how unpredictable Zombies can get.

Zombies give you cards for 1942. I won a free copy of Anniversary at Wizards and I notice that Wizard has a 1942 setup so I was wondering if those 42 cards in Zombie work on the Anniversary board?

Now as for the worst defeat I’ve ever had. I launched an attack against Germany with USSR with a 80% and had to retreat because it was getting embarrassing. I was angry as hell but some times the Dice just piss all over you. I’ve never seen so many 6’s that battle.

I can’t remember the numbers but I as China beat Japan with a 30% chance of win. Japan launched an attack against my Chinese stack of infantry and the Tiger with Japan being equip with infantry, artillery, tanks, fighters, and tactical bomber. Don’t get me wrong, my stack was thinned but I manage to protect the Tiger.

That’s the point though. Sea Lion is an objective for Germany but there is no justification for doing while the USSR is still a credible threat because once you capture London, there is no way in hell you can defend against the US liberation and the Soviet invasion. Hence, just don’t do it. I am only suggesting that if one wanted to do an early Sea Lion, you will need Japan to put so much pressure on USSR that Germany can focus completely on US thus Japan will lose in the Pacific. I agree Sea Lion isn’t a wise move.

Here is the problem with the proper threat of Sealion. Any Axis and Allies player who wants to be taken serious are already going to to defend against Sea Lion regardless of G1 buy. For example, any UK player should already be beefing up London regardless of what Germany buys. I think UK players who don’t do that are playing the game too ignorantly. Unless the G1 buy is completely ridiculous for Sea Lion I.E. buying all AA guns, then you should always beef London.

Japan can go full into USSR if Sea Lion is the objective, the problem is that Japan WILL lose in the Pacific and if Sea Lion fails, then the Japanese offensive was a waste of time and resources. For example, Japan going full into will look something like this; put a Major in Korea, a Minor in Manchuria, build up on these factories for one turn; invade USSR. Use 80% of the main attack force to go after the Eastern USSR army and the 20% against Mongolia when they join USSR. If you done this correctly, you will control the eastern sector of USSR, Mongolia, Northern China, and have an army threaten invading Moscow. This will force USSR to move from the west and force itself in the center. The problem will be US, they could double down in the Pacfic; thus forcing Japan to defend their island but that will delay the liberation of UK or they could double down in the Atlantic and thus the Pacific becomes a dead zone. Problems with this plan: If Sea Lion fails, then Japan is completely out of position against UK who would of secured the Dutch Islands and China who had enough resources to beef their military. So in short, Japan can help Germany more than you know but it will lose in the Pacific.

It’s hard to completely say what one should do. I personally think it’s wise to go after UK battleship and hit the Canadian fleet regardless of action.

I hate to break this to you but the term ANZAC actually doesn’t apply to WWII era Australia and New Zealand. It goes for the term in WWI, however to somewhat contradict this statement; there was an ANZAC corp giving by the UK to a combine unit in Greece. So it did exist in small numbers but as far as the strategic use of it, Australia and New Zealand never combined their arms into one military in WWII. With that said, I don’t think you can find an ANZAC roundel for WWII as I am guessing each nation would use whatever their roundel would be.

To simplify the rule for any new players that read this; you cannot blitz through a friendly neutral I.E. they stop once they enter.