In SBR do you still add 2 to the roll of a Strategic bomber?
If Amur is attacked via amphibious assault, and all invading units were loaded from a territory other than Manchuria or Korea, is the Mongolian penalty (bonus depending on your point of view) still activated?
I seem to remember answering this question somewhere else.
In any case, the answer is no. You cannot go to a hostile sea zone in a non-combat move.
Ok, thank you. But you can place new units into a hostile SZ via adjacent IC correct?
Here is my situation. SZ 6 is occupied by the American Navy, and the IJN is within striking range but out numbered. So my question is, can I ncm my fleet back to SZ 6 to regroup with some naval units to be built that turn? Or does the U.S. Navy need to be removed first?
In a recent game I played, Germany did SBR AND interdiction. London’s economy went down the toilet!!! Eventually I still won, but only after 2 days of nonstop play. America, Calcutta, and Australia were my main achievers.
Thanks, I’m in mid game and misplaced my rulebook. You just saved 1 Italian inf and art from annihilation good sir :wink:
You have to be good at allocating your resources since you’re fighting in just about every direction. Use your land troops efficiently and don’t take any pointless casualties. Replacing infantry is cheap, but the time to reposition them is not. Don’t waste $ on factories (though investing on only 1 or 2 can become useful). Transports will get the job done and are more versatile. Your starting land units and air force are strong enough to punch out most of China. Your navy should bully the allies while it has the numerical advantage, but survival must be its first priority once it has lost that advantage. My philosophy with Japan is to dominate the Pacific, and not fool around with Russia. Germany and Italy may have problems to deal with, but Japan has its own too.
I found the truce I made collecting dust in one of my drawers, while cleaning my room yesterday. I thought I’d share this for fun. My friend was the Axis and I was the Allies. Here is our “document” word for word lol: “I Michael Ratzburg hereby formally surrender the military of Japan unconditionally to James Robert Mullen II, because I was outnumbered, and would eventually lose due to unrivaled strategic maneuvers by my allied opponent. This document was written and signed by I, Michael Ratzburg, by my own free will and was by no means forced upon me by said allied player.
P.S. Sleep deprivation, in no way, influenced this decision.”
Ah, I’m so merciless sometimes lol :evil:
I would either use a combined allied effort to retake Cairo, or reinforce Moscow. If you play Russia right, you should have ample time since Japan is out of the picture in the Pacific. Who owns DEI?
If you think the Global 1940 map is too big, wait till you see the huge 1939 map they have at Historical Board Gaming. Also, there is another A&A type game called “The War Game” which is pretty cool, but it has a huge map too, about the same size as HBG’s 1939 map. My gaming table is barely big enough for Global 1940 (it actually hangs over the top a couple of inches). I recently got “The War Game” and put it’s map on my table and the darn thing hung over almost a foot in both width and length. One day I hope to find a bigger table or perhaps make one with a sheet of plywood like was mentioned.
I would like to know more about this war game. Do you have any links or information about it? I’d like a war game with a little more depth than A&A, but not more (or too much more) complex.
Lol I did that to a friend of mine once. Ah sweet sweet revenge :evil:
I had a game once where Japan owned most of the board (Russia, China, Calcutta, Hawaii, and most of Africa) however, I lost because Germany and Italy were both wiped out (this was also before the new victory conditions for the axis, as I would’ve won otherwise due to Japan’s VC amount) It was 1 axis power vs too many opponents. In your situation, if Japan isn’t in jeopardy in it’s own realm of influence, and Germany/Italy are still strong contenders, you should have a good chance of winning if all 3 are close enough somewhere on the board to help. Try taking Japanese forces from South Africa and conquer Brazil. At the very least, it will distract the U.S.A. This is all just my opinion though. A general must follow his own instincts :wink:
@SAS:
@WILD:
Does anyone think its strange that if there are no attacks that bring the them into war early, that the US (rd #3) can declare war a full round before Russia (rd #4)? I know it must be a game mechanic, and Germany may need till that time to get turned around. That plus the US is far away from the action, but it just seems strange to me.
Well, not a full turn before the Soviets, since the US goes last in the order (besides China and France, which don’t really count :-P) plus they aren’t allowed to declare war until the END of their 3rd turn.
So the sequence (barring any pre-emptive strikes by the Axis powers bringing them into the war early) will be like this:
Turn 3:
US3 - takes turn like normal neutral power, declares war at end of its turn, collects income, and ends turn
Turn 4:
G4 - takes turn like normal, except now it can’t ignore US ships on the ocean like it could the first 3 rounds
R4 - can immediately declare war and make attacks this turn
So since the US goes last of the major Allied powers and the Soviets go first, they basically enter the war at about the same time. Plus, any smart Soviet player is going to formally declare war on the Japanese turn 1 (they can do this per the rules and it doesn’t cause anyone else to go to war), and just not actually attack. That way they can move into Persia and have a shot at taking Iraq and all before the UK can take that stuff from them. The Japanese just have to play nice with the US for the Germans’ sake.
Actually, being at war with Japan means that Russia is only at war on the Pacific board. Since they are still neutral on the Europe board, they would not be able to annex any neutrals in the Middle East.
ANZAC being small is a big disadvantage if it is targeted by a major Japanese offensive, but if they underestimate them, ANZAC can grow into quite the little menace. First priority is make sure you can put up an adequate defense of Sydney. Second, try to increase your income, but leave the DEI for UK if possible. Lastly, if/when you feel Sydney is safe, do whatever you can to help the rest of the Allies. It’s a team effort, and ANZAC needs to get in there.
As for my current game, London may have fallen (for now, but liberation+reinforcement is on the way) but Cairo is a fortress. I plan on Australia taking Norway and Morocco, while the U.S. begins a bombing campaign on Europe and Tokyo. The Allies aren’t going to win quickly, but with each turn I’ll come closer to victory. :evil:
@Young:
Depends how the game is going. In a current one I’m locked in right now, Germany is running rampant, Moscow has fallen, London has fallen (liberation of London will occur this turn as Axis garrison is really weak with 1 inf), but Japan is contained to Tokyo and makes less than 10 IPC a turn. In this scenario, I’ve moved ANZAC’s base of operations from Australia to Brazil. Now, they can feasibly contribute to the Allies in Europe.
Sounds like Sydney is soon to be in jeopardy.
No worries about that, the Pacific Theater is undoubtedly under Allies’ control. Japan has no ships, and 1 fighter. The U.S. is about to routinely begin SBR on Tokyo. China is a monster and will prevent Japan from retaking the coast, IF Japan even manages to rebuild a Navy while a combined fleet of U.S. and ANZAC ships sit in SZ 6.
Depends how the game is going. In a current one I’m locked in right now, Germany is running rampant, Moscow has fallen, London has fallen (liberation of London will occur this turn as Axis garrison is really weak with 1 inf), but Japan is contained to Tokyo and makes less than 10 IPC a turn. In this scenario, I’ve moved ANZAC’s base of operations from Australia to Brazil. Now, they can feasibly contribute to the Allies in Europe.
If an allied player (UK for example) moves an AA in China, it can defend the Chinese units in the territory correct?
What I’d like to see are some Official (optional) NA’s :-D
As far as tactics go, I think it’s advantageous for Germany to put a sub in a far corner of the Atlantic out of reach of anything. The sole purpose of this tactic is to deny UK an NO for as long as possible. I don’t know about you guys, but a u-boat in any part of the Atlantic that can be considered useful, doesn’t live that long for me. A cost 6, and if you deny the NO for a minimum of 2 turns you’ve already made good on your investment.
Best time to do this would probably be with a starting sub since U.S. is neutral.
I agree. I don’t think defending subs should be allowed to retreat, but they should be able to submerge. If you think about it, that’s the tactic they employed when they encountered a destroyer. I like the 1-1 match up. Should (defending subs) not matched up be allowed to submerge before first round of combat? I think so.