J1 What do you buy and do?

no.

aa50 costs more now because it had a small limited print run. aa40 games are not limited and larry harris believes they will have multiple print runs.

@Wilson2:

What would be an interesting game would be if Japan took US but ignored the other nations. Then Japan fighting UK, ANZAC, and China.

It is possible, but if the USA player knows what he’s doing, is maybe a 20-30% chance, tops.

@calvinhobbesliker:

If the Jap fleet is at Singapore, what stops the US from taking Truk, which threatans all VC’s except Calcutta and San Francisco? What stops the US from landing in Korea? You need quite a few planes in japan to stop the capture of Korea, and those planes are needed in the CBI theater.

x4 fighters and x4 dive bombers.

At least by US2, and maybe even on US3, depending on where the US fleet is based out of.

@The:

No. but if you just buy AA42, you get a bunch of new pieces (including A and A guns). And it’s only like 25$

@Autarch:

That’s your best bet. Plus you’ll get a lot of extra units so you don’t have to use poker chips.

That is what I did with AA42. My boys didn’t want their copy so I bought it, with 1 game played, for $20 to add to mine. Now I need a bigger table so I can print one of IL’s maps for AA42 to have a good sized board for more pieces and less chips used.

no.

it seems like no one is answering the threads question.

japan initial purchases are transports, then subs and destroyers to keep usa back. they have enough tacs already
china they can not purchase tacs
uk needs to buy ground units
anzac needs to buy cheap naval units
usa is the only country that i would even consider a tac purchase. then give my head a shake and realize that i need more important units.

Sure, I hear what you’re saying, but it really didn’t take me long to get the fleet back to a position.  And I don’t recall the ANZAC transport being an easy kill in J2 - my opponent doesn’t throw it away so easily.

And what else is there for the Japanese navy to do?  It’s not like the USA navy is going to move in right away because of this move.  There’s till plenty of navy at the Phillipines.

I have no need to persuade you.  I think it’s a good move, and will likely do it again in the future.  Yes, it invites ANZAC to attack you with fighters (depending on how much J brings down) and perhaps invites the USA to venture farther west, but that’s fine with me.  It’s like a trap.

So my group has completed a game where Japan went for America.  We figure that whether or not Japan wins is dependent on a few things.

I don’t remember whether the final assualt on WUS happened on J3 or J4.  I think it was J4, and they waited until J3 to attack Alaska?  Either way, the statistics were about a 45% chance for Japan to take WUS.  They needed some AA misses to throw it in their favor.

There really is little that the UK and ANZAC player can contribute to the defense of WUS.  The best thing for them to do is go crazy in the absence of the Japanese forces.  By the time America fell, the UK had liberated most of China, and had several rounds to build up a navy with the help of the DEI income.  Australia also had a bonus going on, adding 2 loaded carriers to supplement defense of the UK fleet.

Japan thought about going straight for Australia, but the UK fleet with transports(deploying from  Kwangtung and Kiangsu factories) was already threatening Japan.

While America had fallen, they only gained +10 income from America, +Mexico +Alaska, while giving up on their territories in the Chinese mainland.  They were being out produced by the Allies, and out of position to restablish a hold on the mainland.

The second link you sent seems to apply- thanks for clearing this up.  I was rereading the parts in the rule book and it is very unclear and contradicting when talking about the “scrambling” and the “amphibs”

So then even a combat move with no sea combat that results in a amphib is still grounds for scrambling.  I’ll tell Kreighund to clear this up in the FAQs because it is worded very badly.

thanks
:-)