“The cruiser should not have been used that way, or lost that way… after you read the rules about subs, you won’t make that attack again.”

Thats not true. If the sub chooses to keep on fighting, the cruser can and probably will sink the sub. If the sub submerges, you can still land your forces into Vyborg.
The only thing you did wrong in this fight was, that the USSR could as well scramble one plane from Leningrad, and therefore, would most likely sink your crusier and destroy your fighter and you won’t be able to land into Vyborg.

@Kreuzfeld:

actually, you are entirely on the “kill 3 inf”

first off all, you are assuming the axis will defend weakly, on the shores. many axis wont do that, secondly you are assuming that you could not get the same result by adding planes, and the planes would gain something by not helping.

an eksample would be

invading with 2 inf against 1 inf, with 2 Cr,  against 1 inf, your average losses is 1.5 ipc

invading 2 inf against 1 inf with 2 ftr support, you take 1.3 IPC in losses

the inf you have left, will attack defend and kill about 1.5 IPC on defence.

most axis players will deny you the advantage of doing microinvasions agains weak stacks.

I am not assuming the axis is weak defending! Thats the point. You won’t attack a stack you are likely to loose against with air, but you can with crusier bombardment. UK does not really need 2 additional infantry, but needs to distract Germany from solely focusing on the USSR. So attack a Stack of ANY size with 2 Inf and 2 Crusier bombardment. You have a reasonable chance to inflict 2 losses by shore bombardment for the loss of two infantry. Every plane you would have sent would be lost. Thats my point.

To get to your point:
invading with 2 infantry against 10 Infantry would economically be prefareable with crusier bombardment and not by sending in planes. Thats what I wanted to say.

At last: Infantry and fighter are the most valuable pieces in play. Best Bang for the Buck. But if you need to add to your fleet and you are thinking about a destroyer, just keep in mind, if you are planing to start a lot of amphibious assaults it just needs 4 landings until the crusier (1) will give you a benefit.

@Kreuzfeld: As far as I read this discussion, we were discussing by comparing crusier to destroyer or submarines, not to planes. Planes are always the better by than ships.

As I stated before, UK (Europe) is the only nation benefiting from crusiers. They can bombard every turn, need a fleet defense and are not in the position to build Battleships for this duty. You just need to kill 3 German/Italian Infanterie to be “equal” to building Destoyers. (2 Crusier instead of 2 Destroyer). This will be accomplished with approximately 3 amphibious landings in Europe. Afterwards they will effectiveley save you money or Infantery or at least cost germany 3 IPC every landing, succesful or not. A Fighter might be cheaper and even better in attacking a terrretory, but it is possibbly lost to bad dice, a bombarding crusier won’t get sunk while bombarding.

To me, the UK could need some.
Why:

• not so expensive as an Battleship.
• helps defending your fleet
• can make coastal bombardment, when you want to take a terretory
• can make coastal bombardment, when you just want to weaken the enemy, while you don’t want to risk your precious planes in a fight you will loose, or if you need your planes else where (soften up Normandy for example)

You could as well use some with the US, ANZAC, Japan or Italy

A standard USA move cannot be presented. Too much is depending on the starting moves of Germany and Japan.
What you shuld do as the USA is the following:

• How does Europe and the Pacific look like. Can the UK harass Germany and Italy or does it need immediate help to do so?
• Where did Japan move its fleet.
• Did Japan attack the small fleet around Hawaii?
• Is it safe to move the US-fleet to Hawaii to threaten immediate counterattacks on turn 2 and to pin down Japanese forces?

suggestion: Reinforce the US-Fleet on turn one.
about: 1 Transport (7), 2 carrier (32), 2 Submarines (12)

• You can leave your transports to die, if you can take a valuable island, just always keep new loaded transports comming. Japan is quite short on groundforces. You can force them to use their ground forces to retake some islands.
• threaten an attack if japan doesnot keep its fleet together.
• Stay out of their airforce range in the beginning (so they have to move their airforce in unfavorable position to attack your fleet).
• Sacrifice your fleet, if you can inflict a lot of damage by doing so (especially in the early rounds) and divert Japanese forces from attacks on India.
• Try to kill as many groundforces with china as possible.
• Setup small counters with ANZAC. Keep at least 1 loaded transport in reach to JAVA.
• Use ANZAC Forces to destroy lonely Japanese transports or small fleets.
• Maybe sacrifice ANZAC forces to weaken Japanese positions (like 2 loaded carriers, a battleship and 2 destroyer with 3 fighter 1 destroyer and 1 crusier) to crush them with the US.

In addition: Use the 18 Russian infantery to threaten Manchuria and Korea. If Japan needs to take care of them, India is releafed at least one turn and the south pacific should be open for counter attacks.

@Young:

I have been complimenting my J1 attack with a G1 attack on Russia (not a popular strategy, but I stand by it), anyway… that’s for another thread.

I would be quite interested, in how it works out. Seems like a lot of lost infantry and some tanks due to some russian counter-attacks, or do you spare some of the british fleet attacks? To me it seems quite difficult to attack France, Sz111, Sz110 and some russian terretories. Something could defennitely go wrong. Maybe just start another thread and explain how you do it.

Just one more comment on an additional UK complex on the pacific half of the board:
I think, they added UK-India and ANZAC to Global 1940 just for the reason, to make the game more fun and interesting for the japanese player. In most cases the game is won or lost in Europe, not the pacific. So fighting Japan is not reasonable. You can do it for fun, but fight germany to win the game.

my 2 cent.

Yes, Carriers and aircraft move independently, but the rulebook just states, that warships may not move …! It states nowhere, that aircraft can’t move to any seazone. They are not allowed to land on any allied terretorry or aircraftcarrier, but they can of course fly ther and if there is a legal landing spot, land there. The planes are not restricted to not move into the atlantic, they (in most cases) can’t land and therefore can’t stay there.

You can’t Blitz a neutral and you have to end your move there.

See Page 10, A&A Europe 1940 rule book.

I think, that’s the way to go.
11 or less victory cities is too easy for the axis.
12 victory cities for less experienced axis players (7VC on europe and 5 on the pacific side seems like the allies are loosing on both sides. Only 1 victory city to go for eiter a european or pacific win).
13 victory cities for experienced axis players (Win on one side of the board but don’t loose the other)
14 victory cities seems to be too difficult, but if you want a challenge as the axis, or if you really, really want to play the axis

Keep it global, even for the axis. (My personal opinion.)