Can Japan Attack Russia

Thanks man.

@WindowWasher Good day. Japan needs the income from the DEI and need to keep India on the defensive, not expanding. I agree with Awk others here: Oz can wait. Make Japan a monster first.
I have played close to 100 1940 games and don’t think anyone has tried to take Sydney from me early on.
Try it, but I don’t think it would work against most players here.

(Unlike what the others have said, I’m not that much of a friendly kind of guy, but I did genuinely mean the line about welcoming you to the board.)

@ShadowHAwk:

@aequitas:

90 % of the time I would attack a lone BB or a loaded/empty Carrier.

6 ipc’s vs 16 to 20?
Yeah I’m in!

It depends a lot where the BB or carrier is as well. Near a friendly naval base no point you damage the BB and then what. If it is not then you also force it to retreat.

Chances of a sub vs a BB are not that great, VS the carrier it is pretty ok ish.

Exactly, this is where I got my 90% from. It should be a good opportunity and not a suicide run.
The possibility to cause damage and not to drop water on a hot plate!

@aequitas:

90 % of the time I would attack a lone BB or a loaded/empty Carrier.

And sometimes the dices got their own way.

Never tell me the Odds! :-)

I really appreciate that Cow

I agree that Japan should be split, and have two sz"s.

Then we could have Sea Lion on the Euro side, and Sea Serpent on the Pac side.

Who ever is the defender when the pact is broken gets +1 defense to all their units on the first round of combat, in combats launched by that opposing power.

So that encourages players to keep some units on the border….because they will defend as if they were tanks on the first round.
Or an AAA would defend at ‘2’ on the first round.

Think trench warfare…both those powers were expecting an attack on that front (defensive posture) but didn’t have the initiative, or reason, to launch an attack.

It’s per turn.