US Income in AAG

We had a game where Axis totally dominated, I mean, allied pieces were basically off the game board, put away, done. We called it day, left the game as it was, one of the players came back over the next day, and it was Germany/Italy VS Japan, where within 5 hours, Japan ruled the world :)

We only did something like that once, but was a cool variant. I don’t think I would like to start that way, but continuing a war after its over by a new declaration or war was a nice touch.

@ShadowHAwk:

@ODF:

@knp7765:

Turn 4 Even though Japan’s attack on Turn 3 put the US on a war standing, they will still only have their pre-war income to spend on defenses.

I’m not sure about this

It is pretty obvious though. USA2 they collect 52 ipcs.
USA3 they are at war and have 52ipcs to spend, only at the end of USA3 they get the bonus.
And then germany will attack and take that money away from them.

We’ve been playing (erroneously, it seems) that if U.S is at war, they get the bonus at the beginning of their round.  I didn’t realize they didn’t get it until the collect income phase.
Thanks for clarifying.

@knp7765:

@theROCmonster:

@Young:

We experimented with a house rule that gave the US the War Bonds breakthrough for free once they entered the war, it was no big deal to give that to them, and it was fun to see how each roll for more money turned out for the American player.

Sounds fun. I think it would be interesting to give each of the major powers a free tech at the end of turn 3. What would you choose for each power as your tech?

Germany = Jet Fighters
USSR = Advanced Artillery
Japan = Super Subs
USA = War Bonds or Increased Factory Production
China = none
UK = Radar
Italy = Improved Shipyards
ANZAC = Long Range Aircraft
France = Heck, why not give them Heavy Bombers. They won’t be able to use them anyway.

Looks good!

There is a reason why I strongly prefer to play the axis.

My last live game I was like, “I will give you a Russian bomber, 5 usa inf anywhere in mainland america, a sub in sz 98, and an infantry on new guinea. If I get to be the axis.” He was like “that sounds like a really good deal.”

It was a close game.
~

It is like America’s economic system, it will crash then money will be reallocated based on the social security system. That is the game plan. If you think about it, it makes perfect sense, sure the people who start out with the most monetary wealth in this new system will be the ones who paid into social security the most (makes sense to me). Everyone has other wealth, land, possessions etc so wealthy people will be fine.

I do not see why anyone would be afraid of the dollar collapse.
~

Just try that 5 inf USA, bomber russia, sub 98, inf new guinea. Like if you are good with the axis you should be fine with the allies getting all that stuff.

Still fairly new to these forums. Before I begin, I should say our group plays alpha .2 rules, with the exception of no scramble, kamakazis, and we use original strategic bombing (no interceptors). Our group has decided that having the U.S. spend $100+ in just the Atlantic is too good. Also, it seems kind of “unhistorical” if you will. So we split it up giving some of the NOs to East and West United States. They act similarly to UK London and UK India, where war with one is war with the other, same attack move blah blah blah. I was curious if anyone else has tried this?

Oh and just a random afterthought, how do you guys play canals? This is how we play it:

No matter the amount of spaces before entering a canal, you must stop in the SZ before it. Then, on your next turn, the ships may move through, but only a single space. Then normal movement from there on out.

Another version we play is this. No matter the amount of spaces before entering a canal, you must stop in the SZ before it. Then, on your next turn, the ships may move through it at any length the ship could normally move.

We do this for two reasons. One is to keep the U.S. Pacific stuff, in the Pacific. The other is to slow ships moving up from Africa into the Med. Thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Thanks!

@leddux:

@Krieghund:

@leddux:

can you upgrade the minor complexes to major status paying the 20 IPCs while still neutral?

No.

They changed that rule.

@Sime:

That?s a pretty interesting strategy for that specific scenario.

Do you think he was aware that Germany could reach his capital before you sent the Italians to America?  In your opinion, was he buying all the talk of you sending the Germans to Egypt?

I think if I was in your position I would have sent the Italians to Africa instead of attacking America, keeping up the illusion that Axis is heading south.  If he didn?t perceive the German threat, he would be sending his units to intercept the Japanese and hopefully leaving his capital lightly defended.

It?s a bit riskier this way because if he sees the threat and stocks his capital, the Italian units are no longer in position to invade America and divert attention away from the Japanese, but it?s just another way of looking at the situation.

Anyway, great write-up, Pelanderfunk. I enjoyed reading it.

No, he definitely saw it coming. Truthfully, the Italians were a bit of a waste in the US – all they really did was give the US a few more targets. On the other hand, maybe the resources he wasted on those targets could have won the war if he used them differently.

My opponent tends to let his emotions leak into his strategy. I knew that if I sent even a tiny Italian fleet over, he would destroy it the first chance he got, even at the expense of a more benefitial move.

What stops US or UK placing 4-5 fighters in Gibraltar. Each would roll a 2 vs a 1 the escorting fighters if any(lack range i think) might get. Each Bombing raid would cost the attacker 1-2 bombers from defending fighters before you roll AA.