What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

The only time I have built an air base for Holland is when doing sea lion from sz110. It was a long time ago, but I believe I did it because the US had a couple loaded carriers (sz102) and bombers in range to hit my tpt fleet after the assault on London. I think we were testing out sea lion theories at the time, so the allied player knew that sea lion was a good possibility.

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-)

When our group gets together, we usually have 6 players:
#1 = Germany
#2 = Russia/China
#3 = Japan
#4 = United States/France
#5 = United Kingdom/India/ANZAC
#6 = Italy

5 Players:
#1 = Germany/Italy
#2 = Russia/China
#3 = Japan
#4 = United States/France
#5 = United Kingdom/India/ANZAC

4 Players:
#1 = Germany/Italy
#2 = Russia/China/United States
#3 = Japan
#4 = United Kingdom/India/ANZAC/France

3 Players:
#1 = Germany/Italy/Japan
#2 = Russia/China/United States
#3 = United Kingdom/India/ANZAC/France

2 Players:
#1 = Germany/Italy/Japan
#2 = Russia/China/United States/United Kingdom/India/ANZAC/France

1 Player:
#1 = Germany/Italy/Japan/Russia/China/United States/United Kingdom/India/ANZAC/France

Okay, that last one was just a goof. It’s late and I’m getting silly now. Later all.

it says “and/or” and it is the most common way to phrase such a requirements in games.

for basic gramar;
a, b and c = a and b and c;
a,b or c = a or b or c;
a and/or b = means if you have a and b, its ok, if you have a, its ok, if you have b, its ok.
same way you can make a list.

@WILD:

Wow this thread was cool to revive. Haven’t heard from many of those guys much as of late, but they have some great insight for the allies.

Garg’s point was for the allies to win, they first must not loose. Keeping in mind that Cow was part of the conversation, and is one of the best Japanese players (that thrives on early Japanese attacks). Garg’s point of stacking Anz early and def Hawaii so the Japanese can’t steal a win on the Pac side is directly linked to very good Japanese play. It is also noted that the Anz needs to build some navy and air to help the US, but their main goal is to not loose Sidney.

There is also some good advice about how to use Egypt to supply air to Moscow to prop it up (building an IC & AB as early as plausible), while also building up Egypt to be a last resort defensive stand if Moscow falls. I also like that Q mentioned evacuating India as an option to turtlng and losing all your units. I have evacuated India in the past and traded it to stall the Japanese (they can’t land air on it, so it could be a good chance to kill Japanese ground units). This is a little painful because of the stupid capture capital/plunder rule that should be a one time only IMO (house rule). Those India units can really help in Egypt or Russia if they are alive, and is doable if the Anz and Hawaii aren’t weak, or are shielded. Plus once the Japanese take India they need to decide if they immediately head to the 6th VC for the win (Sidney or Hawaii), or possibly make a move on the Mid East, Egypt, Africa, or north to Russia (maybe linking up with more Japanese units pounding through China).

I agree with all this, generally speaking. Japan can take any one power at the time. The only way to slow down Japan is for all nations to cause Japan to enter attritive battles. E.g., put Japan in a position where they have juicy targets to hit (with something to compensate you for it, like time, loss of position or gain on another front), but too many of them to address.

Go back to SCHOOL Degrasse, nobody wants to hear what you have to say.

Oh wait… I guess I was the one who asked… :P

looks around

I bet it’s in the pacific manual too, or the original pacific Alpha.

@Spendo02:

@Krieghund:

The US cannot win this battle.  The fighters will continue to defend in the air until the battle is over.  The Japanese fighters and US subs can’t hit each other, so the fighters will sink transports until the US retreats.  If the US wishes to conduct this amphibious assault, it must bring units that are capable of hitting the fighters.

This is one of those unique situations where you are required to take Trn as losses before subs because that is all the unit can hit?

Yes.  They just need to be the only legal selection for a loss.  That might mean that planes have no other target (like this example), or that Sub hits have no other ship targets, or that the defenders hit everything else in a round of combat and need to assign some more hits before the defender retreats.  Remember, the defender still has the option to retreat, if they can, and transports are only automatically destroyed when they’re attacked, not when attacking (unless the attacker has no place to retreat).