Italy Strategy (Video Added)

@scotth409

I also play this with my gaming group. I agree with squire - Allies have the advantage.

Japan can grab Indian rnd 3 (naval base in French Indo rnd 2) and if you’re playing to win, that’s the way I would go.

If you want to create more play in Africa/Med you can try a German airbase in Greece rnd 1. Britain can attack with fig, tac, bmr, cruiser for an even fight with the destroyer and 3 figs.

If you want to try something a little crazy with Japan, have a look at the following;

1 bomber, 1 fighter and 1 tactical_bomber moved from Japan to 26 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from 6 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
1 tactical_bomber moved from 6 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
1 battleship moved from 6 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
1 destroyer moved from 6 Sea Zone to 26 Sea Zone
1 submarine moved from 49 Sea Zone to 62 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from 42 Sea Zone to 62 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from 42 Sea Zone to 49 Sea Zone
1 cruiser, 1 destroyer and 1 submarine moved from 47 Sea Zone to 49 Sea Zone
1 fighter moved from 33 Sea Zone to 49 Sea Zone
1 cruiser moved from 33 Sea Zone to 49 Sea Zone

If all goes right you won’t be in bad shape. However, there is a massive whole in this opening that can be exploited by US/Anzac. If they choose not to scramble in Pearl Harbor they can attack the BB and loaded Carrier in sz 54 with 3 fig, tac and bmr then have Anzac clean up, if anything is left. You can prevent this by bringing in an extra carrier and landing the 2nd fig from the attack on sz 49. BUT, you can only do this if you’re not forced to provide landing for the surviving fighters in Pearl. All in all pretty messy and not a very good opening. Let me know if you take the plunge and how it works out.

Best move for Britain IMHO is an airbase in Gibraltar. I don’t use the US fig to attack the 2 German des, just 2bmr and a des, this gives you an extra fig in Gibraltar. The idea is to park your cruiser in sz 92 to prevent Italy from getting thier NO. They can attack, but have to cover the scramble and will have their fleet wide open for a counter attack.

@Mark-Prinsen said in US strategy:

I see something in the rules about not being allowed to move units into neutral territories, and that you cannot move units on carriers or into transports of another country.
But nothing about this.

Find it in the blue box on page 14, Pac.1940.2 rulebook:

“The United States: The United States
begins the game neutral, and as such
isn’t initially part of the Allies. Being at war
with no one and having a strict isolationist
policy, the United States has especially
tight restrictions. It may not move land
or air units into neutral territories. It may
not move units into territories or onto
ships belonging to another power or use
another power’s naval bases, nor may
another power move land or air units
into its territories or onto its ships or use
its naval bases. In addition, the United
States may not end the movement of its
sea units in sea zones that are adjacent to
Japanese-controlled territories.”

@AlphaAeffchen:

@ Kreuzfeld. You are totally right but the problem is if i do this buys for UK they can do nothing for many rounds in Europe. Italy gets very strong in the med. The USA have to fight Japan. The allies in Europe  are getting a problem because UK is isolatet because of only inf buy and USA has to Focus on Japan (but you are right i have to do this buy for UK).

In the scenario I made, US will only have to buy 2 bombers on US 1 (in most scenarios) and move 3 of the US planes to canada. They are capable of going towards Japan if Germany don’t buy the TTs in G2.

If germany doen’t buy 3 TTs on G1 (and save their money instead), I am doing taronto, and buy 6 inf and 1 ftr and lose no time in the Med. If they do buy 7 art on G1, I am buying a mIC in egypt and 5 inf in UK.

The only “loosing investments” UK has is : 3 inf instead of ftr on UK1, no taronto on UK 1 (I think 3 useless german transports might be too steep a price for germany to pay for this result).

The other losing investment is the canadian airbase and a few allied TTs on UK2/US2, however, they are more than offsett by the 9 german TTs that has to be bought to force me to do it.

The advantage I get for this plan is that no german should try for the sealion after US1, then that is just a lost game if they buy the 9 TTs. This means that I can (if I want to) send everything US builds against japan, including US turn 1 build. I am still taking Persia on UK1, so I can build the mIC on UK2 and shut down the middle east as fast as possible. My favourite way of playing the UK is to have 1 mIC in each of iran, iraq and egypt, and to use them to buy volumes of inf and mechs for a giant uk landarmy that can reach where i want them

I still think the game is favouring the axis, all I was commenting on was that in a J1, it is so much cheaper for the allied to prevent the sealion, so it will never happen.

That is indeed the strategy, and it relies on the allies having pretty bad luck to smash up those stacks without losing 50% of your starting planes.

Germany can replace the planes, but not at the same time as it builds mechs, armor stax
Japan has even more planes, but it needs even more than Germany does because without them, its a paper tiger.

The problem with doing these stub attacks is if you lose more than 50% of your starting air power before turn 5, you will not be able to force your victory cities and strategic objectives.  The consequences are felt several turns later (7,8), when you cant smash stax because you lost your mobile strikeforce.

Gotcha.  I think we’re talking about two different things though.

My understanding was the other poster was saying “Placing fighters in CUS is no different than placing them in EUS” which of course wouldn’t be the case.  I see your point though and I agree  8-)

I jest, of course  :-D

@Cow:

and let me guess axis won right? exactly italy makes 40 that is game.

Yep.  Italy really carried the game. They also got heavy bombers and they just started unloading on the UK London side. The UK spent most of the game fixing stuff that that Italy had bombed the turn before. Then they crossed over and did it to India and that allowed Japan an easy time taking it.

@soulfein:

-middle east fac(s)
-convoy raiding sz97 till ita turns into china in 41 v3
-trying to hold india to fly air to moscow and/or helping egy after moscow s fallen
-looking to normandy drops only after japs caged n usa can stack some transports in sz91

Bam…that’s it.  Most games are going that direction.  Rome and Cairo are the kickbacks before Moscow goes down.  From there it gets even- very long slow grind.

The battle is won in the Med/Africa/MidEast region period.  It gets very tactical and dicey here, which is why I think the game is even, Allied advantaged as the game gets longer, past 10 rounds.