It’s going to take time and effort to kill those 18 inf and capture those 9 IPC’s.

I have to agree with the overall standpoint that there is no real incentive for Japan and USSR to not be at war.  There is no strategy for them to not be at war other than both players deciding on their own that they won’t be at war.

Here are the options.

Russia does not DOW.

1. Russia puts all 18 Inf in Amur.  Japan Kills them all J1.

2. Russia pulls the majority of Infantry back and leaves one guy buffer zone.  Japan uses minimal forces to attack the one guy buffer zone and take what Siberian territories are available.

Russia DOW

1. Russia attacks Korea but doesn’t gain any IPC.  Japan takes Korea back and eventually advances into Siberia.

2. Russia pulls the majority of Infantry back and leaves one guy buffer zone.  Russia also moves into Persia.  Japan uses minimal forces to attack the one guy buffer zone and take what Siberian territories are available.

I don’t see many options here.  There are no game designed incentives for them not to be at war.

EDIT: I can think of only one reason for Japan to not attack Russia, and that’s if it is planning on doing a J1 attack on UK/ANZAC/US.  I haven’t played enough games to know what the best Japan strategy is yet though.

I agree that Fighters should stay at 10 and I don’t object to Tac bombers being 12 and Strat bombers being 15.

I think there was a discussion a few weeks ago that 10 IPC for a Fighter might actually be too cheap but I think 10 is acceptable.

EDIT: On second thought I might prefer Strat Bombers at 14 instead of 15.  3 IPC more than a Tactical Bomber might be too much.

This is the second poll regarding win total right?

US is generally the only power that I purchase Bombers with besides the occasional UK or Japan purchase and if I’m Germany and purchasing bombers then it’s pretty much over for the allies anyway.

I probably wouldn’t object to Bombers being 14 IPC instead of 12 but I’m not sure why it was reduced in the first place (I assume it was because some units were reduced and others raised and new units were added).

Haven’t finished my first game of Global yet but the UK seems fun because it is a challange so far deciding where to focus your effort.

Played Pacific a dozen times or so and I can’t say I enjoy being Japan because I can never decide how to use the air power and I always manage to screw something up.

Germany and Italy look like they’d be a lot of fun when I get a chance to play them.

@mwindianapolis:

how about just toss for them?

UFC cage match in the back yard!  :evil: 

@D_Runyon:

I might be in the same boat (7-8 players). I thought it might be interesting to split the UK east-west and pair the two UK players London-France and India-China.

1. Germany
2. USSR
3. UK-London; France
4. UK-India; China
5. Italy
6. ANZAC
7. Japan
8. USA

Sounds like a good idea there.  I would give France to the Anzac player though as he won’t have a lot to do until later in the game if the Allies are winning.

Yeah it is very noticeable.  It then made me even notice the slight difference in ocean color between the two Pacific boards.

@BadSpeller:

I learned the move from Don Rae’s assays. It was a move to get UK units into Russia’s capital, to help Russia live more rounds. To do it UK needed to send a unit there early in the game. Of course that meant weakening an already weak UK position somewhere else. Cause and effect. Nothing for free in A&A.

I know what you are saying but I don’t see how that rational justifies a free move.  With that rational we could make a new tech called the instantaneous transportation machine, you can go from one zone to another that is 1 move too far for your unit to move but it’s okay because you weakened your former position.

@BadSpeller:

@Seven_Patch:

@Krieghund:

@13thguardsriflediv:

Is it legal to use units from Southern Germany and one from Romania to ‘fake attack’ Yugoslavia for one round, disengage and move the stack to Romania?

Yes.  This is known as a “strafing attack”.

I’m surprised this is a rule.  It boils down to Infantry get to move more than 1 space a turn on land.  Not for me.

This move has been done since the 1980’s.(A&A Classic)

I’ll take your word for it but my dad started playing the game when it came out in 1986 and I played the game as a kid in the late 80’s/early 90’s and I’ve never heard of it until I read it on these forums.

PS. I should note that I never read the original A&A rulebook, learned by just playing the game.  I assume my dad didn’t play with that rule for the same reason that I won’t.  Free moves don’t make sense, you might as well say that after taking over a new territory after the combat phase, any or all units that moved during combat into the new territory may also move again during non-combat.