Anti Aircraft Guns

Perfect.  Thank you so much…

Makes sense now, I appreciate it. :-D

@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.

Thank you all for the clarification!

Looks great, I was thinking of having the 1942 map printed onto a plaque about the same size.

Nice work.

@GCar:

Anyone voting DD as not understood something in naval fights.
Anyone voting bombers as not understood the value of strategic bombing on his killing target (Russia or Germany usually).
For ground units, Art is the call (if no AA guns), but the winner should be in the ships area.
I will have to say Crusers, very close to Battleships, and maybe of subs depending which side you play the most often.

i disagree… Strategic bombing is Valuable considering the OOB rules,  it applies to damage only which reduces deployment capabilities.  however, depending on the game situation, it may be far more beneficial to add 4 Inf. to your forces on either attacking or defending.  especially when you risk your bombers to AA Fire.

Russia Barely has the Money for bombers, Germany is better off with 2 more tanks or 4 Inf., Britain usually needs that money for the navy or complex/units elsewhere, Japan usually needs more naval units or another complex, USA is the only when with the non threatened expendable wealth early on for bombers…   again this does depend on the current game situation, what round, how certain battles go, etc…

but to vote Bombers doesnt mean the player doesnt understand the value… it means he purchases these units less for whatever reason…
 the only other unit i purchase in the quantity i purchase bombers is Battleships, but they are more appealing for obvious reasons and every country (except Russia) has a need for a battleship at some point.

@Buddhamonster:

You could always play with house rules. I personally like allowing two to fire per territory. Makes AA carry a bit more weight.

this would be TOOO powerful….  in the rules a single AA Gun in a territory fires ONCE at EACH fighter, Then ONCE at EACH Bomber.  
so if (some Land Units) 5 fighter and 2 bombers enter a territ …
and the bombers are doing a raid while the fighters (and other land units) are in combat.
that means the AA Gun 1st gets 5 shots at fighters, then 2 Shots at bombers… any ONE’s rolled are hits

If you allowed 2 guns per territ to fire your doubling the chances to kill the planes, with Units that only cost 6 IPC’s.  It would be too easy to buy a bunch of AA guns and put them everywhere

Air units are the only units that cannot non-combat move into a territory taken that turn.  You can “reinforce” territories that were captured the same turn with any land units you want (that can reach of course), including AA guns.