Rule Question Fighter and Aircraft Carrier

@cernel That looks right.

US carrier on A1 is bad imo. I am a huge fan of the all inf build or 1 transport and rest inf on A1. This is because you can place your inf on the west coast and move them to wcan and on t3 you ship them all to europe and keep your shuck shuck optimal

LOL that just sounds funny

Yes I know it sounds like a Porno term.

In Classic, it almost works even better, since the “retreated” Japan fleet, plus additional units moved in to defend it in the retreat sea zone, are then within striking distance of almost anything they want to hit: Austrlia, New Zeland, Alaska, Western US, Mexico, SFE, Alaska, Midway, Hawaii.

And any new navy/consolidation by the US in the Pacific is within striking distance of that same Japan fleet.

Yes but I think you overestimate the importance of Austrailia/NZ/Hawaii and the Eastern Pacific Rim to Japan, and to that extent I think you would be under able to respond given slightly abherrant dice rolls. Further you seem set upon the idea that the US should build a fleet and even with good dice by Japan the US can take the fighter and get it in Europe and have a huge advantage.  If over the span of say 8 turns the US builds even 1 additional ftr and bmb then they can attack Germany in WEuro and Berlin with 10-12inf 4ftrs 2bmb bb.  This gives them ~6hits round 1 whereas normally they’re looking only at 3-4.  IMO this is a huge difference and borders very close to inviting a mid round attack on a Fortress Europe stronghold by the Allies unless you over garrison these terriorites which in turn will mean less Russian committment in the West which will allow it to hold off or even push back the Japanese in Asia.  Ultimately you end up with a very strong Russian Asian presence which prevents you from ever going to Africa which in turn deprives you of the IPCs needed to win.

The second possibility is even worse and this is that Japan gets bad or good dice.  Should Japan roll bad then obviously a counterattack is possible or the loss negates the effectiveness of this move.  Should Japan get “good” dice say take minimal loss while getting two hits, the US can and it should be assumed kill off its carrier ftr in order to retreat the sub so that they can trap the Jap Navy in Pearl to attack it.  The best defense against a Pearl counter is to be doing well enough in Africa so as to not give the US the ability to risk its units and thus the game in such a risky counter attack.  In other words anytime I’ve seen Pearl get counter attacked by the Americans it was always b/c of either two things.  First the Japs rolled bad or two b/c the Germans got mauled in Egypt.  Either way however the solution is to not fear the US at Pearl but to make them fear Germany in Europe.

Who says the fighters will be lost?  The fighters will prevent Germany from taking Egypt and after the UK kicks Germany out of Africa, Russia can move them back.

hasbro interactive, yuk

“I thank heaven for a man like Adolf Hitler, who built a
front line of defense against the anti-Christ of Communism.”

Religion, the opium of the masses.

Huh! I always thought a SUBs submerging ability was the same as “withdrawing” in place–that is, you get a counterattack at any naval units attacking you and may then submerge or withdraw. That adds a different dynamic to things…

Ozone27