Another Noob Question, Regarding Friendly Territories and fighters

It is considered controlled at the end of the country’s turn.

As for the US, what you want to do is get a total of 8-10 transports, and split them into two groups equally. Send one group to Sz1 or Sz2, the other to any seazone (preferably Sz6) between Britain and Europe. Send land units from Eastern US to Eastern Canada. Take the units from here and drop them in Britain with the the first group of transports. With the second, drop the US forces somewhere in Europe. This way, the U.S. will have many forces on the ground, rather than a just a few.

One important concept to grasp in this game is the difference between a “turn” and a “round”.  A turn consists of one country going through the seven phases (Develop Weapons through Collect Income).  A round consists of all countries having their own turn (USSR though USA).

The rules say that “an air unit may end its move (‘land’) only in a space that was friendly at the start of your turn” (page 18), and “they cannot end their move in hostile territories or in any territories you captured this turn” (page 21).  Since the word “turn” is used, rather than “round”, you may land your planes in a territory that was friendly when you started your turn.  It doesn’t matter that your ally just captured it on his/her previous turn.

Hope this helps.

on the US invasion of Europe, i have found that landing in smaller waves has worked good. also having the UK lead the first landing. even if they fail to taking the teritory, the US can follow up and take the land.
the advantage of smaller landings is that it keeps Germany having to move troops back from the USSR front to continually counter your landings. as a note also the 7 BB’s were a few too many, you could have invested in a few more transports instead of say 5 of the BB’s. also pound for pound on a landing Artillary are just as good as tanks. a tank +Infantry = 4A and 5D. Arty+ Infantry = 4A and 4D. the advantage is the money saved, you said you waited 7 turns to land, in 7 turns you could have invested in arty over armor and came out with +$10, that $10 could have bought a nother transport and i’m sure you had the troops to bring in, even if not, that could have bought a fighter to add as fodder for the landing from UK.

I tend to disagree about the art and the tnk.

If all is finished in one round you sure are right cause the attack values of 1inf + 1art (2+2=4) are the same (on average) as 1inf + 1tnk (1+3=4) but if the battle lasts more than 1 round the last option is much stronger. This is because if you take 1 hit (just as an example, if you have more trn loaded this way you can have more hits, but the princaple stays the same) in the first case you loose a inf with an attack value of 2 (aided by the art) leaving 2 for the art. In the second case you loose the inf too, but you keep the tank wich has still 3 on attack.

I’ve heard the term “skew” to describe this concept (unevenly distributed attack values).

but by saving the money he can bring more units to the battle making more fodder if need be but also adding attack value.
if cash to creat more transports was not an issue then no big deal, tanks would be better. but when you are making a big attack, some times having more troops IMO is the better thing to do. one extra Tran adds +4 attack to the first round and adds more fodder to sustain the battle and also hold the teritory for a counter attack.

You are right more units change everything. I just wanted to point out the diffrence between art and tnk as second unit to a trn.

You have to use what the situation requests for.

yes and the point i was shooting for is to save money to add more troops to the battle in this situation. had it been a more straight forward land battle with out a landing then tanks would have more advantages, but then again less posible units to field. it’s balance that is the largest issue. you need to find a balance that works best for you.

for USSR, a token deffence is all you want in the east.
be aggressive with USSR, not so much so that you are throwing men away, but enough so that you trade teritories with Germany.
UK should take Norway for the IPC’s and to get land troops landing there fast to support the USSR. this way they have more land troops to hold teritoris and the UK will eventually get enough to go offencive via land too. this pulls German troops east so the west and south are less deffended.
i preffer for the US to land in Africa instead of UK. this way they can use there large fleet to hit ether South Europe or west Europe and the Germans now have to guard both.

@Heckler409:

ah, interesting.  So do you think that having 50% art and 50% tanks with 100% troops in the US transports are a good way to go?  or maybe a slight variation on that, like 75% art and 25% tanks.

What about the UK forces?

It might be important to note that so far we’ve not played with the faction specific advantages.  I don’t know how that would impact this.  How do you guys play with that addition to the game?  Do you use all the advantages or do you pick/ roll dice for 3 of them instead of all?

I appreciate the responses.

before playing with National Advantages

i suggest playing with Weapons Devealopment

when we played wiht NAs we put them all to play, its much more simpler and better that way if you ask me

just use LHTR 2.0 NAs since in previous versions  Flying Supperfortresses were too strong

so just to suggest using LHTR 2.0. for both Weapons Devealopment and National Advantages

and enjoy the game

LHTR 1.3 are not bad either, but those do favor the Axis a bit more than the NA’s for 2.0 do.

@ncscswitch:

LHTR 1.3 are not bad either, but those do favor the Axis a bit more than the NA’s for 2.0 do.

you re right

LHTR 1.3 is also very good

OOB is pretty unbalanced

but i recomended him LHTR 2.0 since its the newest, and probably will become ˝standardized˝ as default NAs play

for NA’s i have only used one at a time. but i strongly recomend get game balance (where the games go ether Axis or Allies based on skill not dice)and mecanics down first.

as for UK landing, it depends on what the UK landings job is and how big you can make it vs how large the German deffence is. if your going suicide and it’s likelly you won’t last beyound round 2 of combat, then no tanks as artillary will be almost as good over all (round 1 just as good, round two it will be so small a diffrence in attack value you may not notice it). this way the lose of $ is less to you. if the battle runs a good chance of making it to round 3+ then you may win to begin with and a few tanks may be good to have, but still bulk up on arty and inf.

US landing, well i would say still bulk up on arty over tanks. landings are one of those battles IMO that you ether win or lose on the first round, and if you lose there is no retreat. for the typical landing i would again rather bring more troops then strong troops, even though strong troops will do the killing. it’s all situation and personal preffrence on what you bring. personally i would rather bring an extra transport and have all my ships 1 inf/1 art then bring less transports with 1 inf/1 arm. if you can squeze armor on transports and still bulk up the fleet then go for it.

with the UK on UK1 land in Norway, this is the easiest of all Europe countries to take and hold, it bost UK economy and gives them a bridge to support USSR with land units. also for UK1 build some more ships and plains to keep your sea bridge open. if the Germans see what your doing, they have 3 options. ignore it (good for you), send plains after it; if you have a Destroyer, a few transports, and a Battle ship then you should be fine this will hurt the German air force a lot and buys time for USSR and also may destroy the German air power, last is the navy attack. if they try a full force navy attack then they open to latter hits right into the sea, also they would have to build up a larger navy to win, so thats less money going against USSR. they could always go combo navy/air. but then it hurts you more but it also gives the USSR some time.

US1 incordination with the UK1 landing make a US landing in Africa. Germany won’t have the ships to counter strike in too much force, if they do, then the ships arn’t being used else where. if they use air power with the attack on the US fleet then thats less against USSR and UK. ether way you have now slowed down Germanys taking of Africa. this gives UK more money and Germany less.
on US1 build up your navy, you need lots of tranis and also a few replacement ships to replace the lost ships in Africa, a Carrier, Destroyer, and tranis should do fine.

UK2 keep up the bridge and replace ships if need be. at this point tranis should be all they realy need. send troops to USSR front to bulk it up.

US2 if they hit your landing fleet with there navy, hit it back. if not send in the secound wave into Africa. send old Tranis back.

US latter turns; keep the push up untill Africa is no longer under threat. should take only a few turns to do this before Germany is out of there. don’t send too many troops into South Africa area, this is a good staging ground. just move in when your ready to make a push into the Med and then you can land a ton of troops any place along the med coast, if your opponent sees this he will have to fill in atleast a few prime teritories. he can’t let a major landing happen from the US, if he leaves stuff open for the coutner attack though, land where your allies can bost your numbers or just let your guys get killed on the counter. if they pull a lot to kill you, it means they arn’t doing muck to USSR or UK (if in possision). it also may mean that they just left a spot open for the UK to land in force. then you can land a secound force to bost the UK landing or even take another soft spot or two.
keeping constant presure on Germany is always good as it widdles them down and allows USSR to gain a little more money for the hold out of Moscow when Japan gets there.

You maybe want to read the basic strategies on the homepage for each country.

http://www.axisandallies.org/taxonomy/term/16