ANZAC planes landing in Dutch territories (Java/Sumatra) on same turn they were taken by ANZAC

Thanks for the replies everyone.

As it happens, there was some confusion about when the planes actually landed, so it turns out both my opponent and I were correct in a sense.

The UK planes actually landed on Greece during Italy’s turn after an adjacent UK carrier was damaged, so the move was legal after all.

My bad for incorrectly believing the planes landed on Greece during the UK turn, and neither of us realized what the other was talking about.  :-D

Good to see our fellow AAAers always ready to help out with good answers, though, so thanks again all.  :-)

@JDOW:

@taamvan:

Malaya is too vulnerable, and it takes too long to secure.   HK is far stronger for your later-game strategic defense (free NB), hidden square)

The opposite is the case for Malaya. Yes, it is vulnerable but strategically Malaya is the by far most powerful IC Japan can place.

I think you’re taking FIC as a given there. I can’t see how the Malaya IC is more powerful than FIC. Doesn’t need a naval base built to reach Calcutta?

Thanks. I definitely focused on the Industrial Complex and Japan/China Sections in the rulebook.

@cyanight:

Greece is a perfect place for all three especially if you take Turkey.

Definitely.

@General:

Korea is the only place Japan can drop a Major IC, if they want to go haywire on land units in China and Russia.

Exactly.

@Gamerman01:

@Young:

It might be easier to list the uninteresting territories… Portugal, Samoa, Gold Coast, Greenland…etc

hehe, seems that way, good point

Yes, I listed many territories, but they are not all in the top. That is why I made the descriptions. The players can see themselves that there are several or dozens of them which are the best.

@ghr2

Thanks :)

I’m a big fan of doing damage to Italy early on and basicly keeping them from accomplishing anything meaningful. In Alpha 3 this is accomplished namely by trading navy’s in the med. I brought the cruiser and transport from India to Africa to facilitate amphibious assults on Italian territores on the eastern coast.

My buys for turn 1 Europe almost always include a transport (placed in South Africa to bring my Infantry up the coast), 1 in New Brunswick (shift material from Canada to the UK, but this will depend on U-Boat positions) and a Minor IC for Egypt (implications of this should be obvious). I’ve never lost Egypt to Italy so I don’t think this is a huge risk.

The only real danger to this strategy of focusing on the Med is if Germany takes Southern France, with that Minor IC they can do what I’ve done and place ships directly in the med. Because Germany is such a power house they can (and likely will) obliterate the RN there. You’ll certainly lose Gibratler and likely Malta as well.

For England I generally end up trading navy’s with Germany as well, after Germany has gone and you’ve taken the usual losses to shipping it’s simply too dangerous to leave the German Battleship and Crusier (can’t recall if it’s a cruiser or not offhand) laying around and they must be attacked. I haven’t found a way around doing this yet. With the destruction of Germany’s surface fleet you arn’t under serious threat from Sea Lion until Germany’s 3rd turn.

In the Pacfic I keep the ANZAC island hopping and use them to harass the islands Japan leaves lightly defended. I generally also use them to take Brazil. I never thought of using ANZAC fighters to land on US Carriers (can’t happen until the US enters the war) but I think it deserves some thought. Generally they end up used in an attempt to contain the Imperial Navy.

Hope this was helpful and offered some ideas. I’m open to any critiisms/thoughts on this strategy, always looking to build on my game.

C

If i can really build up with Anzac i can station them in brazil

Your understanding is correct, MarkVIIIMarc.  However, in scenario 2 the UK player has no casualty options that won’t result in stranding the fighter.  Since sub hits must be taken on sea units, the only casualty options are the one you chose or taking both hits on the carrier, dooming both fighters.  At any rate, taking the hit on the carrier and stranding the fighter is always an option.

SHARED THIS ON LARRY’S SITE ALREADY, JUST WANTED TO SHARE THOUGHTS HERE ALSO:

Ok Larry,

Me and an official playtester of yours here in Michigan (his name is mentioned in the rulebook for Europe 40) played Global with the new setup given with all the aircraft taken away and such. Here was a short summary of what happened:

On the Europe side:

Germany played pretty predictably, sinking most of the UK navy, taking France and the Eastern European pro-allied and pro-axis neutrals with Italy. They continued to build on their air force to keep the UK from building ships right away. Began to stack some ground units as well. Italy expanded into Africa and shored the Middle East slowly controlling the Med.

UK responded by NOT attcking the Italian navy and pulling back the rest of the navy it had left until it could come back to England with a strong navy that included the US. UK took the Pro-allied Brazil and shucked the troops to Africa to help the SAfrican force which slowly pushed the Italians back up to Egypt turning the tide in Africa.

Russia stedily built a force consisting of infantry spiced with some tanks, artillery, tacs and mechs. Stacking behind some dead zones and waiting for the declaration of war.

US spent about 70-80% of its cash in the Pacific since it could not even approach Africa/Europe before a state of war.

Now for the Pacific side:

India with little cash built mostly infantry and stacked. Combined navy near India and activated the Persian troops to bring back and help defend India. In Global, India has a little more help from some extra troops west and a few ships, including one French destroyer to help defend. Also, it can fall back with its stack to West India if needed.

ANZAC naval base is much needed and I am glad it is there- balances nicely.

China was stonger, but does what it normally does and stacks at Yunnan to wait to wear down Japs. China units are really used as a delaying tactic for the India crush.

Japan didn’t see an advantage to the India crush in J1 but felt that the initiative came to them in J2. They didn’t want to wait until J3 because they felt the Allies would have established a long-term defense of India. So with that the Japs declared war on J2 taking back the Dutch East Indies and unleashing the fury. Japan built transports J1 and J2 and built more planes to replace the ones missing from the new setup in J2.

Now even though both Japs and Allies have the same amount of planes removed, Japan can build them faster and move them closer to the action (India). US could also build their planes back but it takes them longer to get them to the battle scene (India). Brit India and ANZAC can’t build much of an airforce because of the typhoon of Jap units coming fast, so India stacks and ANZAC tries to distract and/or try to send some units.

Japan can make the US wait longer to send ships and planes down to ANZAC by using its navy as a shield. I as Allies, I made tactical blunder ruining my chance to meet the Jap onslaught of India from behind through Australia. However, if not for this the setup seems very balanced and gave some options to both sides.

A hot topic question will be “what to do with the Russian inf on the Pacific side??”
It is very frustrating for the Russians, if you attack immediately, Japan will bring the heat to wipe them out with now China and Russia give large concessions to Japan $$$. If you stack and sit. Japan has to garrison Manchu with a small force but continues to spearhead to India. I figure as the Russians, you have to attack with the 18 inf at some point. The hard part is when. Timing is everything in this decision.

With US entering the war at turn 2, the US began to throw a good amount of cash to the European side, mainly because of the blunder in the Pacific- India would not last long now- 2-3 more rounds. I recovered nicely putting pressure on the French coast quickly until I made another tactical error involving Gibraltar- arrggh!!!- new rules and new map takes a little while getting used to.  :-(

Besides these 2 blunders, I thought the Global game was pretty fair and balanced with a slight edge to the Allies. I definitely think the Allies are a little easier to play because that sides is spilt into 6 sub parts (countries) that are easy to prepare while you are waiting for the Axis to finish. The Axis with so many more units in the beginning, take longer and you have to be very efficient both in the short-term and the long-term planning.

Anyway that was are anaylsis so I hope it helps.  :-)