Chinese fighter and burma

I don’t buy it. It doesn’t excuse USSR to be this weak. The only conclusion I can come up with is ether they didn’t test Germany vs USSR enough OR they wanted USSR to be this weak.

@taamvan:

The carrier “swap” would only work if the carriers started in SZ 38, the other distances are too far to “shuttle bomb” (my name for that swap).  Unless you have the air base, or more carriers.

So J1 you move your carriers to 36, J2 to 38/41 to block 37 getting blocked :) Both of those SZs support a swap on J3.

@taamvan:

With no mobile units to start, how could UK take Yunnan?  It just cant get there until later in the game to threaten it.

So if UK moves its initial units to Berma on UK1, and then Japan is taking Yunnan on J1 and retaking it on J2, those Berma units would be easily enough to take Yunnan on UK2, right?

@taamvan:

The J2 is what is stopped by the blocker.  On J2, Japan can move to SZ 39 at peace, so it just ignores the blockers.  Then you’d use the UK/ANZAC trick, we hope.  J3 is impossible to stop, but it just wont work because there is no landing place (Burma, Ceylon) for the bulk of the fighters.

J3 is impossible to stop if you do this, but the 3 TTs you build on J1 will be at your SZ36 Naval Base on J2, and rely on SZ37 being open to participate.  And if UK is at peace UK2, there’s nothing stopping him from moving a DD to SZ37.  Isn’t the point of the initial transports that you’re hitting Calcutta with 12 land units instead of 6 in front of all of that air power?  Seems like a much more IPC-favorable battle.

@taamvan:

The best move is to get 6 men into Burma, in a way that UK wont attack (because he is afraid of defending short), then get 6 MORE men the next round, so you double the transports ability too.  This only works 1 time because of the limited number of ground troops the Japanese have in that area to start, unless you slow down the whole plan in general to a J3.

I didn’t quite understand the part about doubling the transport ability, but I think you’re referring to using the initial TTs to take Burma J2, right?  That move puts pressure on Calcutta while making sure you keep the Yunnan landing zone.  How can those TTs be reused though, I only see the 2 units in Siam that can get in position for that?

Regarding the Chinese territories controlled by Japan at the start of the game, I place Japan control markers on those territories when I set the board up. It’s a big help for me when one of those is liberated and the Japan marker removed as, later on, I quickly know who controls it at a glance. If Japan re-captures it, I place the marker back.

If the Germans have a fleet, they can attack up north from SZ 112 (threatening Karelia, Novo, Arch, Nemestia), there has to be a specific LZ for the fighters to cross which you can threaten or deny as long as you have attacked them on G2 or G1.    Fighters crossing the med have a slow time of it.    Maybe some help can come in the form of making it more inconvenient for the UK fighters to get into Russia in the first place?

I also dislike blowing the Russian NO by having allies hanging out in Russia before its abs necessary, but that could be pretty early in the game.

“Sea Lion”  if the USSR has a fleet and Novogrod, they can keep this threat alive for a long time.  No matter what I want to do with UK, I usually end up buying 6+1 and bringing as many Canadians across as I can.  If I lose any significant ## of fighters, UK has to continue to worry that Germany can bring wave after wave of attackers, which keeps me conservative.  This is why the Gibraltar air base or crossing to Russia early would be difficult;  I don’t have enough fighters to protect UK and project threat.  Once they cross to Russia, they cant cross back…

“Get Cairo”  That sounds awesome but with a UK bid of 10, its not going to happen.  If Germany and Italy build/rebuild navy and try to control the Med, that’s a subtle win for the Allies.  Navy is resource intensive and takes away the armor punch described by the other posters.  Without an added commit, I just don’t see how the Axis can take Egypt at all, there are just too many UK pieces around there.  Germany can fly or bring ships down there but its a 1 way trip, into a dead end trap, and its away from the critical path (Russia)

“Tan Skies”  you are on the right track;  if UK has 6+ fighters it is kicking butt, if not, it feels cornered and powerless.  The key for the axis is to do the strongest opener that doesn’t invite any scrambles, then the UK navy is dead and Germany has most of its air left.  The UK also doesn’t need to lose any (many) fighters during its opener, other stuff can take the casualties.  Its especially good if the airforce from Taranto lives to fight another day (by avoiding the Italian counterstrike, we hope 1 sb 1 French inf 1 tac 1 fighter on Syria?)

Hey Hey Hey

Thanks for the response and the clarification everyone!

Duthman

Yeah, I have to admit that I have done that in the case of existing carriers. I say I will move the carrier to a certain spot so planes involved in a battle close by can land. Then the planes get killed (which I figured they would) so I leave my carrier where it is or move it to a “better” place.

Thanks!  :-)

To be fair, this is why you never ever ever send carriers anywhere without a destroyer. The same problem happens if you send a carrier plus fighters to attack submarines. Since the carrier doesn’t roll attack dice and the fighters can’t hit the submarines, you just have infinite rounds of combat until the subs either sink the carrier or the units retreat.

This is also why it is recommend that when playing the pacific side as either Japan or the US, you purchase at least one sub for every carrier that the other side purchases.

You should also never tip your carriers on defense if you have no where for your planes to land, since the attacker will almost always retreat and watch your planes crash into the ocean for free.