Generally pacific builds consists of a 2 to 1 ratio of subs-destroyer. Following turn is 5-6 bombers. This forces Japan to start building fleet instead of troops for India/China crush.
I just had to give som additional thumbs up fo9r this comment :D Buying other combat ships than subs, dds (Or CW + ftrs) is rarely correct. the 2 to 1 ratio shos that sean knows how fodder works and how it is the most important thing in these battles.
The only reason to stop buying the subs is if japan for some reason dont respond with fleetbuilding and only buys planes instead. But then you should win anyways :D
which is why i said that it didn’t work against a too planeheavy japan. on theory, the DDs + other surface ships ofc needs to be enough to stop all the planes of japan + 2 rounds of plane only builds of japan.
What would prevent japan from attacking your fleet of subs-destroyers with air and a few destroyers. With 20+ planes they can whipe out your whole fleet with minimal losses as subs cant even hit the planes.
I normaly go for a carrier heavy fleet followed by subs destroyers for attacking power. Ideally i want my carriers to bait an early attack from japan that i can crush in the counter and get his carriers and BB out of the way so anzac and UKP can clean up the rest.
Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)
-
Ugh, this has me stumped, and it actually came up in my game tonight.
I have an undamaged carrier, fighter, tac
attacking
1 transport, 2 submarines.I don’t retreat because I want to sink the transport, so I need to score another hit with my 2 aircraft.
If my opponent elects to submerge his 2 submarines, does that take away my retreat option?
In other words, can you retreat after a submerge when those subs were the last remaining units with attack values?I re-read the retreat rules and I can’t determine, because step 6 condition A says attacker or defender loses all units (not the case here - the subs were not “lost”) or condition B, attacker retreats.
-
You can’t retreat. While the subs weren’t destroyed, they are no longer participating in the battle, so the defender has lost all units in the battle that can either fire or retreat.
-
Man, I appreciate that fast answer so much. We’re playing back and forth quite rapidly now, and with this very quick answer there is zero break in the action.
Thanks, K!!!
-
Thanks in advance for this hopefully easy-to-answer question:
1. USA has taken S. Italy. There are German troops, but no Italians, in N. Italy. In this case, is the N. Italy IC reduced to a minor?
2. Also, if Germany is unable to retake S. Italy but keeps forces in N. Italy, thereby leaving Italy’s capital in Allied hands, does Germany automatically take possession of N. Italy? In this case, does the IC remain a major?
-
Thanks in advance for this hopefully easy-to-answer question:
1. USA has taken S. Italy. There are German troops, but no Italians, in N. Italy. In this case, is the N. Italy IC reduced to a minor?
No. IC’s are only reduced to minors when they are captured by enemy troops. No other IC’s are reduced when a capital falls.
2. Also, if Germany is unable to retake S. Italy but keeps forces in N. Italy, thereby leaving Italy’s capital in Allied hands, does Germany automatically take possession of N. Italy? In this case, does the IC remain a major?
Never. North Italy remains Italian until captured by an Allied power. Then if Germany takes control of North Italy and Rome is still in Allied hands, THEN Germany gets control of North Italy. It works this way for all powers and capitals. It’s the same as the French. The capital falls on G1, and the French territories remain French until an Axis power takes control of a French territory. THEN, an Allied power can wrest control of that territory back from the Axis, and THEN they take control of that territory for themselves. Until the capital is liberated, in which case all of that power’s ORIGINAL territories immediately revert to the original owner’s control.
The IC remains major regardless - see #1. -
Wonderful, thank you for the quick reply!
-
A couple of questions……
1. Does a sub prevent bombardment from cruisers and battleships (no destroyer present) I think attacker can choose to ignore the sub, right?
2. secondly, if the bombarded area (such as western germany) has an airbase and you scramble a fighter against the attacking sea units, then no bombardment can occur, right?
3. Given situation 1 and 2, the attacker also attack the airbase, you can stil scramble from air base, right?
-
1: I’m only 99% confident in my answer here, so I’ll let someone else do it for me.
2: Correct. The scramble creates a sea battle, so no bombardment.
3: You choose your scrambles before any attacks are made, so yes, so long as your air base was undamaged before the start of the combat phase, you can choose to scramble/intercept/remain at your whimsy.
-
A couple of questions……
1. Does a sub prevent bombardment from cruisers and battleships (no destroyer present) I think attacker can choose to ignore the sub, right?
If the attacker chooses to ignore the submarine, no sea battle will occur. So bombardment during an amphibious assault will be possible.
-
That’s right, the sub can be ignored and so the ships can bombard, unless the defender scrambles something, which brings the sub(s) into the battle and they can’t be ignored
-
That’s right, the sub can be ignored and so the ships can bombard, unless the defender scrambles something, which brings the sub(s) into the battle and they can’t be ignored
Just to cover all the bases, the sub can then submerge before the fight and effectively decline to enter the fight, mind you.
-
If ANZAC attacks Japan, does Japan continue to collect 10 IPCs for trade with America? the condition reads “has not made an unprovoked declaration of war on UK/ANZAC”.
-
Yes, Japan still collects
Can’t be at war with USA, did not make unprovoked DOW on UK/ANZ and has not attacked French Indo-China
3 conditions
-
Thanks
-
Clarification, please.
1. Does a sub prevent bombardment from cruisers and battleships (no destroyer present) I think attacker can choose to ignore the sub, right?
That’s right, the sub can be ignored and so the ships can bombard, unless the defender scrambles something, which brings the sub(s) into the battle and they can’t be ignored
But, a lone transport cannot make an amphibious assault against a Sub. A surface ship is needed to drive it off.
So,
If the BB and the CA do not drive off the SS, how is the AP able to get past the SS?
If the BB and/or the CA engage the SS, then no bombardment.This seems inconsistent. But if that is the way the rule works, OK
-
But, a lone transport cannot make an amphibious assault against a Sub. A surface ship is needed to drive it off.
Right, but we’re talking about bombarding ships escorting the transport here, so this is not an issue.
So,
If the BB and the CA do not drive off the SS, how is the AP able to get past the SS?AP is a transport? What do you mean by “drive off”?
With an escort, the sub can still be ignored.
If there is a scramble, then the sub is in the battle and the cruiser and battleship or whatever would have to win the battle for the transport to unload and conduct amphibious assault.If the BB and/or the CA engage the SS, then no bombardment.
That’s right
This seems inconsistent. But if that is the way the rule works, OK
I’m not sure what you’re asking. Let me know what you think about my explanation above - I think it might have answered your question. If not, ask follow up question please
-
What prevents the SS from engaging the AP(transport)?
The sub stops the transport if is is alone.
If the BB or CA don’t engage the SS why does the SS not stop the transport? -
What prevents the SS from engaging the AP(transport)?
The sub stops the transport if is is alone.
If the BB or CA don’t engage the SS why does the SS not stop the transport?Now I understand your question.
Subs can be ignored.
An exception to the rule is unescorted transports (sub prevents that combat movement from being made)
However, in this case the transport IS escorted, therefore the exception does not apply and you are back to subs can be ignored.However, if there is a scramble, then there is combat in the seazone and the sub joins in the combat and cannot be ignored (after all, it is not alone - it has defending aircraft with it).
In other words, a warship can always ignore subs unless there is a scramble of aircraft, regardless of whether transports are with it/them or not.
-
If Russian troops attack an empty Korea during turn 2… does that negate the Mongolian rule?
-
@Young:
If Russian troops attack an empty Korea during turn 2… does that negate the Mongolian rule?
Doesn’t matter if it’s empty, if Russia attacks Korea before Japan attacks Russia, the Mongolians will never join the Russians
Similar to the NO where Japan can’t attack FIC. Empty or not
Suggested Topics
