UK Pacific

@argothair yes that indeed is an issue. That is why i stop doing taranto but this form of Gibastion. This way i save the fleet and carrier. So UK 2 i move them (UK fighters from the Med and London who are now in algeria) to Egypte and there on to Moscow. Togethee with the Anzac fighters this gives Russia a bit of breathing space.
The factory in Egypte buys subs and a fighter turn two and from turn 3 on fighters abd Land units .
It is not the perfect plan but wirh a US going 75% KJF you can’t invade Europe direct.

@ShadowHAwk:

@barney:

So a solution to the KJF only allied way to win would be ?
Seems like Japan would have to be weakened and possibly the US as well?

Maby change the turn order so the game becomes more balanced.

How about.
Germany, USSR, Italy, UK, Anzac, US, Japan, China, France.

This makes a decent game in the med because Italy actualy keeps its fleet.
UK-pac gets 1 more turn buys effectively and a battleship.
Anzac fleet is grouped.
US fleet can group.

So less easy targets, India has 1 turn extra buys so harder to get from japan. Same for the anzac.

At least J1 will be less predictable, UK1 will be less predictable and it gives the allies the initiative in the pacific.

While this completely cripples Japan it makes the European Axis absolute monsters. Don’t see how the axis would ever loose. UK looses his fleet off Egypt right away and his forces in Alexandria. Italy takes Egypt T2 100% and then what do the allies do?

Ya, you are more able to invest money into Europe as US, but could you stop a monster Italy/Germany?

One big thing I’d like to note is that I really don’t like that Anzac can can open for US. This is way too powerful.

Turn 1: 2 subs, 4 inf, and a mech. Or 1 sub, fighter , 4 infantry. Depending on how froggy you feel ;)

Turn 2: as many land units as possible!!!

It’s also good to have some ANZAC fighters closeby or in your US pacific fleet (they can land on a US air craft carrier).

When US troops get ashore somewhere, they can land and give a strong extra defence (in Alpha3),
and on islands where there are airbases already, they can scramble as well.

An accompanying ANZAC destroyer (and/or sub) or 2 can also be of value, in case some risky US attack doesn’t go as planned, the ANZAC units can still fix certain problems (taking out something with a sub/DD + fighters, or blocking enemy fleet if needed).

Anyway, teaming up pays off.

I can see the math and I understand what you’re saying, I just never see the Germans come out with enough to chew through the stack of 14 infantry in their first round attacks, and my counter-attack is usually very devistating. Germany only has a very small window to pull of a sealion, if they can’t do it on the third turn, its not going to happen. Again, since this will take 3 turns to develop, there are too many variables to consider, what the Germans buy, what units they move to where, the effects of strategic warfare (bombings and subs), what the Russians are doing, but im confident that that stack of forces would be enough to hold London in the event of a G3 sealion, somewhat  :-D

I have just finished two games of Pacific 40 w/ the alpha+1 setup rules and i need a few answers, really appreciate any help.

Is america supposed to collect all of thier no’s after there at war, europe ones included. I only ask this because i was japan for both games and i completely dominated the allies, and it wasn’t because poor plaiing by the allies they really had no chance.
                                                    Breakdown
Turn 3 japan finishes off the last of the chineese and have thier ships off the coast of mallay.
Turn 5 Japan wipes out india and remaining fleets, there are two now are positioned off of japan and iwa jima.
At this time the allies surrendered because japan now has twice the fleet of america and almost twice the ipc’s. (This game was over before it started and the second game followed the exact same course even with the allied players switching forces.

Is japan to strong with the alpha+1 setup, i know there weaker than oob but it still seams 1 sided to me, i mean it was a total massaccer.

Oh yea i even took french indo-china on the first round both games and didn’t get the ten ipc bonus. I need help to understand how how the allies have a chance

If this is correct, then how would a newly built carrier in SZ110 not matter?

-  The UK can now launch an air attack on SZ113 with 1 or 2 fighters (depending on if a destroyer was also built in SZ113) and kill the entire transport fleet along with any hopes of a G2 operation Sealion.
-  Depending on any surviving UK naval unit it can also launch an additional attack on either the damaged (?) battleship or the lonely cruiser with the remaining fighter in the UK and 1 or more destroyers.
-  Finally the main attack on the Italian fleet can still go ahead as planned … and depending on G2 builds, the air units used can fly back to the UK the following round to assist against a possible G3 Sealion.

… all that for the cost of one carrier? Seems like a pretty good deal to me.

It is correct except UK can still attack 1 BB, 1 CV and my 2 Fighters with 4 planes. The CV build stops that. It is necessary. MY APs are placed with the CV and protected.

odds are like less than 10% for him to win.

3/3/3/4 vs. 4/2-2/4/4/0/0

@GrayBlaZe:

Yes and I have even a bigger color difference between the two European boards.  So much so that when I show it off so far to three different people the first thing thay say is wow the size is impressive, the second thing is, “look how different the blue is in the sea between these two boards.” stands out big time.  Not a big deal to me but I can see how obvious it is when it keeps getting pointed out…

Ours also has quite a color difference. There’s more yellow in the blue of the Pacific board - or the other way around, can’t check, don’t have the board here. It shows less in the land areas since abit more yellow in brownish colors won’t show that much.

Also it shows so hard because there happens to be a LOT of ocean there. :)

Doesn’t really bother me, though.