The confusion seems to be in you’re holding back naval ships for naval bombardment. The advantage about scrambling planes is that it forces the attacker to commit all their naval ships regardless if they want to or not. That’s why it is sometimes wise to scramble in a losing battle if the enemy is relying on bombardment for victory. The easiest situation would be when Japan invades the Philippine islands. If Japan was so aggressive that all they brought was two infantry with two cruisers as example. I would scramble the fighter in that situation because while I will lose the sea battle, if you choose to invade the island after the battle, you’re doing it without naval support which gives my defending infantry a better chance at winning.
Best posts made by Caesar-Seriona
-
RE: Can scrambled air units fight in the land half of an amphibious assault?
-
RE: Vichy rolls
Nope I absolutely disagree with Grenade on this. Once again, I am going to beat this dead horse until it gets into the head of the people who wrote the rule book. If you wanted the player to auto move French ships converted to Japanese/German, you would of put it in the rule book. You didn’t, you used the term “sail”. My group basically requires these ships are untouchable by the enemy until they A: return to the new owners home port or B: they engaged in combat and as result, removed their French flag shield.
-
RE: ANZAC
If ANZAC can afford to pull this off, then this shows that Japan is not putting pressure on ANZAC like it should be. The issue with ANZAC is that it is forced to play a defensive role for someone. ANZAC can make some offensive moves in early game if Japan doesn’t J1 on US. It’s navy supports the US fleet, it’s air power is supporting UK or USSR, and it’s land forces are defending the homeland. If ANZAC is able to afford bombers and carriers, either the Allies are in a major win swing or Japan ain’t doing its job.
-
RE: Anzac surrenders?
@jbuckbuddy You should always use ANZAC under a different color than UK and the reason why I say this is because if ANZAC and UK attack, as long as an ANZAC unit is present, you can give that territory to ANZAC instead of UK if you wish to of course.
Plus you should keep the colors different so you can see force projection by ANZAC. If ANZAC surrenders before UK, you need to know what units are going off the board.
-
RE: Russia attacking a neutral pro axis nation
@Aaron_the_Warmonger I don’t know exactly the long term goal in Italian hands. The only conclusion I can come up with is to give Italy more of a northern Can Opening attack as well as give Italy more money for longer term play. Again, I find this foolish since it serves great use for Germany anyways. It’s been talked about, as said before, I’ve never seen it done and I have no plans to do it if I am ever Axis. I can see Bulgaria going Italian but not Finland.
-
RE: Can railroad, fortifications, and coastal artillery be built in friendly territory?
The only facility that is buildable on your allies territory is the rail line because it’s the only facility that is built on a territory line instead of the territory itself.
Example: I know a rail line exist but for the sake of argument.
Lets say UK wanted to build a rail line between Jordan and Syria. You would build it on the Jordan-Syrian line however because Syria is French, you need France’s permission to do this.
-
RE: The Bright Skies above Russian Counter-Atttack/Chinese Guerrilla
@taamvan I personally think that 1940 simply wasn’t play tested correctly or not play tested enough. It really bugs the crap out of me that Germany has a 100% win over USSR thus forcing USSR to get help from the Allies or hope that Germany plays dumb. Point being is that the bid allows some flex ability for USSR. It helps even more when the bid is directly put into USSR which I’ve done in my last two games as the Allies. Only then can USSR flex some muscle.
-
RE: Why can't movement be a single phase?
@trig It’s not really needed in my opinion. My thought on this originally was that it was to better track aircraft movement to prevent accidently cheating but as far as I can tell, I don’t see a good reason to not have com and non com go together.
-
RE: Unlucky/Lucky Events
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.
-
RE: Latin America at War and China at War Expansions
Yeah I can’t wait. I pitched the War of 41! and they changed some things about it but it got in none the less.
-
RE: [Global 1940] First round no combat. Theory to alternate bid
@Faramir The objective is not necessarily to get France to survive, it’s to get France away from a script so the player has some freedom.
-
RE: Unlucky/Lucky Events
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.
-
RE: ANZAC Strategies
@Chris_Henry Exactly, it doesn’t work because the game wasn’t built around that concept. I would love to see some one try this.
-
RE: france goes first handicapping system or balancing mechanic
So France going first will allow France to attack Northern Italy which can reduce it to a minor.
The ideal move would be move all French Units to Paris which adds two infantry, two artillery. Then you buy five infantry and an artillery or AA gun to chew up your money and then UK moves all their aircraft to Paris. Doing this will force Germany to move everything against Paris including aircraft. This will delay Germany from going all in against USSR which will allow USSR a lot of freedom on their side against Germany. I’ve been playing bids of $60+ so this should be tested.
-
RE: UK as one economy
@Tirano There is a Commonwealth build you can find somewhere on G40 about it, there is two different versions which merge ANZAC and Canada as the Commonwealth and then another variant that adds South Africa into the Commonwealth.
-
RE: Turkey At War Expansion - Influence
Yeah you should only Lend Lease if you have the dominate influence against Turkey.
-
RE: Should we make better rules for invadable neutrals? (1940)
Which is insane to see Germany do that is the fact of the matter is that Germany from 37 to 43, did not give two $hits about your neutrality and only choose not to invade Switzerland or Sweden because those two nations had an actually good size military. I like the idea of small neutral alliances but I believe Switzerland should have ten infantry, not two. As Switzerland went into war economy once France was invaded. I would go as far as giving Switzerland two fighters and two AA guns.
-
RE: Is China keeping Yunnan J1 a big deal?
I say yes because it forces Japan to invade India by sea which is great if US is putting a lot of pressure on Japan. It is unfortunate that China can’t stack in India but you can for sure block Japan if you don’t care to hold on to China.
-
RE: Added Factions in GW1936v3
@jcfloberg13 You can do the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere for Japan. For you to do it historically, you would have to have Japan take over or hold on to Manchuria, China, Siam, India, Philippines, and Vietnam.