Scamble and amfib attack

@WILD:

When doing a J1 attack I also sink the Hawaiian fleet. I hit the fleet with a couple dd, sub and 4 planes (2 ftrs/2tacs). I then NCM 2 carriers, cruiser and bb to Wake to pick up my surviving air units. Make sure a dd survives the Haw battle to block out the US ships from hitting your fleet at Wake (leave a few ftrs on Japan in case you need to NCM some air in to replace losses). US can try an ill advised air sweep on your Wake fleet, but if you want to play it safe take Wake Isl too. This will give your air units a place to land so your carriers and BB can soak up the first three hits.

I really like this (especially with balance mode because Wake denies USA an NO), and I would also add a bomber that lands on Marshall Islands.  The problem is all those planes are not in Kwangsi so you lose the threat of pounding an airstrike on Szechwan or Burma, and you might even have a hard time at Yunnan.  You do set the USA way back but you lose initiative on the mainland.

@JeroldTheGreat:

@ShadowHAwk:

kamikazes are basicaly useless in the game, unless there is a huge naval battle

.

Could someone please clarify the kamikaze rules? I thought that you could kamikaze any enemy surface warships in the marked zones during combat movement but I guess I’ve been completely wrong this whole time.

Just to add to Kam rule: Kamikaze can not attack Subs or Transports: So if you go into sz 6, go with a lot of Subs to kill the Japanese navy, but only on attack as a few of you already mentioned. The Japanese player will have to start sacrificing there destroyers if any, which then starts your surprise attacks once destroyers are out of the way.

BH

@cyanight:

That might be the reason Harris designed it so the Flying Tigers stay in the mainland of China. If Hainan was labeled a Chinese territory then the whole rule on transports could become an issue as well as the Flying Tiger being able to attack units in seazones. The way the game is setup the plane is penned inside of China with the exception of Burma and Kwangtung.And if the Chinese could load onto transports it would be easy to use them with USA since their turns are back to back.

Good theory – that may very well be the explanation.  I’d always wondered why Hainan was incorrectly represented on the game map (from the point of view of which territories were Chinese when Japan started conquering them in 1931).  Formosa and Korea I could understand, since China ceded Formosa to Japan under the 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki and recognized Korean independence (which proved to be short-lived, since the Russians and the Japanese both had territorial ambitions there) under the same treaty.

@knp7765:

@kcdzim:

And Allied units that enter original USSR territories should be “interned” - removed from the board with infantry (and infantry only) showing up back in their home capitals a couple rounds later in equal numbers to the units interned   :wink:

In the original Europe game, they had a rule if UK or US planes landed in a Soviet territory with an IC, on the Russian Mobilize Units phase, they could be turned into Russian planes.

I always wondered about something like this.  Considering the equipment lend lease that USA had with USSR I would of thought “gifting” units to Russia should be acheived in someway.  Of course who knows what that would do to balance.  I guess the the Archangel NO is their to represent the Lend-lease activities.

Also if Japan holds off until J2 to DoW, but the US player is either dead certain it will happen or hopes to discourage Sea Lion, they can slap a Naval Base on Greenland and load it up with their starting Atlantic forces US1, then drop the troops off in Scotland or Ireland US2.  If London is saved at that point, you’re still in a decent position to threaten landings from France to Norway, or even farther if the UK player can be accommodating enough to give you a Naval Base.

Thanks for the detail. I think I am going to have to leave SZ 97 alone. Even without German fighters, it is too risky to attack. What that does do, is allow Germany to not have to move fighters south since the attack on 97 is no longer truly feasible UK1.

I tried it already:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=20754.75

It wasn’t one of my better games and I doubt it should be used as a guideline (think it was my third Global?)

I wouldn’t recommend it under the current True Neutral rules unless Germany or Japan seriously sends some loaded transports and a carrier group to contest S. America (and be willing to invest in a minor IC as well).  It’s just too much bonus to the US with all those extra free infantry produced.  Japan could send a loaded transport(s) to take Chile on J3 in conjunction with an attack on Pearl Harbor; if Germany is threatening a Sealion and the US is built heavily into the Europe theater, it might work.  You could also try a combined assault with Germany attacking from Gibraltar on G3 to seize Brazil or Argentina while Japan invades Chile; if you combine both carrier groups together and both powers built minor ICs, it could tie up the US for quite a while.  It will also be a huge drain on the Axis war effort too, for a measly 8 S. American IPCs, but it might be worth it if it takes the US out of the war for another 4-5 turns.

you have to balance the Japan opening w/the European side of the board.    J1 attack was great in Pac40 as we all know, but do you really want to put the US to 80 IPCs on US1?  Ask the Nazi next to you if HE wants you to do that.