Carriers and fighters

To be clear, any type of unit can hit any other type of unit unless the rules specifically state they can’t.

What if we count “landing on a friendly carrier” as one move? That might solve the “overmovement” problem.

For example, a UK fighter should first enter the sea zone controlled by a US carrier, then “land on the US carrier”, this landing process should count as two consecutive moves.
After landing, the UK fighter is treated as cargo and could be transported by the US carrier in US turn.
As to take off, a UK fighter should first move to the sea zone controlled by the US carrier, then move out of the sea zone, wich also should count as two consecutive moves.

In this scenario, the UK fighter could at most move through 8 sea zones during two turns, 3 in the first turn, 2 carried by the US carrier, 3 in the next turn.

Only fighters and carriers of the same power could be considered as “in close cooperation” in the same sea zone (but not as cargo/transporter as in the different power scenario), thus don’t require the land/take off move.

@Col.:

@Scarapis:

@LeonidasBush:

The game starts in Spring of 1942, after the attack on Pearl Harbor. �� If it were the Attack on Pearl Harbor there would be at least a battleship there and, as you mentioned, no aircraft career. �� History takes a hit with this board game, but if the Japanese do attack Pearl Harbor on their first turn it isn’t December 7th, 1941.

yes but not aware of any more Japanese occursions on Hawaii after the attack on Pearl Harbor

Do you only make moves that are historically accurate during a game?

I pick the Allies then!

PS:  Awesome name and picture, Col. Ty Webb.

My foe was not aware of this rule.  Since my 4 fighters scored 3 hits along with my 9 attacking bombers 3 hits against all 6 of his fighters scoring hits I might suggest we redo that round!  Thanks Krieg!

@coorran:

Also, this link. It was on another topic in AA42. It seems like the guy used nail tips and small magnets. Neat job.

http://s436.photobucket.com/albums/qq85/yvestraversy/aircraft carrier/

thats interesting… i might try this.

would gorilla glue or crazy glue work?

Indeed SZ 3 is adjacent. And they could have made a little effort to make this clearer on the board…. At least IL did on his custom maps…

@Patton5:

Other problems… against a canny opponent the UK cannot build a factory in India.  Japan has a huge fleet and troops right next door and so this old time tactic is useless.  I’m struggling to find any effective strategy for the UK in this new version of the game.

Very true. The only way that the UK can put an IC in India against a Japanese player that doesn’t want him to have one there, is if Germany doesn’t take Egypt on G1 for whatever reason.

However, if by some miracle Germany doesn’t attack Egypt on G1, an IC for India is an outstanding buy IMO. Sacrifice the Cruiser in your Pacific fleet to take out the Japanese transport in SZ59. Then on your non-combat move, move your infantry from Persia into India, take your transport and pick up the tank from Egypt and the infantry from Trans-Jordon, and drop them off in India as well. Lastly, take the fighter off of your Carrier and the fighter from Egypt, and land those in India as well.

Then retreat your carrier to whatever SZ you deem safe for future use. You can even move it through the Suez in an attempt to link it up with your Atlantic fleet if the Med is clear of German ships.

This gives you a total of 5 infantry, 1 tank, 2 fighters, and an AA gun to defend your India IC which you’ll place at the end of your turn. The maximum the Japanese will be able to attack India with on J1 is 2 infantry, 4 fighters, and 1 bomber. The chances of a Jap victory are almost non-existent (around a 10% likelihood I believe), and even if they do, you will have completely decimated their entire air force.

Combine the well-defended India IC with an American IC in Sinkiang which is supported by a garrison of 4 Russian troops, and you have a good starting point to your JTDTM defense.

I’ve yet to have a Japanese player even attempt an attack on India on their first turn when I use this strategy. Yes, you’ll be sacrificing a cruiser and a transport….But you’re eliminating a Japanese transport, and establishing a firm grasp in Asia with an IC in India and a large force to defend it.

Now obviously you leave Africa open for an attack which the Germans will no doubt take advantage of on their second turn, but I usually remedy this by purchasing a South Africa IC a turn or two later. Pump out a few tanks in Africa in addition to the three you’re putting in India each turn, and you’re golden.

If anyone ever wants to play a game of AA42, hit me up. I’d love to play via TripleA, or just play by forum (which I’ve never done, but I’m sure I could learn quickly).

That’s what I thought. Thanks!