US first move…

@Dylan:

@221B:

Its certainly one way to try to slow Japan down.  The extra territories for you (and less for Japan) does a couple things, 1) it reduces Japans IPCs and increases yours which is a swing of a few infantry and 2) it forces Japan to take more territories before it can threaten Moscow. Its a gamble if this is a better way to play than simply stacking Russian infantry in Yakut, then backing up to Novo but I think the allies are better off attacking than defending.

What also sometimes happens is 1) Russia takes Manchuria, 2) UK takes Kwang via the transport from india.  Then on US1, the US takes FIC if possible after J1.  This results in Japan having nothing on the mainland after R1.  To counter this in a bid game (though I’m not really an expert on playing with bids), it is typical to add an inf or two to manchuria so that the odds of Russia taking this is slim.

So I’m too stupid.

What?!

I don’t think you are stupid.

@madscientist:

Thank you for your thorough response.

No problem!

Would not have been worth posting unless it showed all the available info, including the initial negatives of the strategy.

At the same time, consider that the first-turn fighter gives you an “early” defensive bonus.

But the Allies do not need an early defensive purchase. If played right the Germans should not be able to take Karelia until turn 5 or 6 at the earliest, and this is without fighter purchases. So considering this longterm reality the shorterm is of no consequence. In my experience the Allies win by limiting/reducing Germany’s ipc level and then reducing their income. With this in mind I’d say a bomber or a carrier is always a better purchase because of their obvious uses.

He was refing to above. Save the IPCs to spend during G2 on inf to go with the trans for the Invasion of the UK. :o :roll: :lol:

Good game. Any time the Axis win is a good one. 8)
(Naval battles are cool, I see you had plenty of fun with subs (heheh)

Case closed!

Ahhhhh….
Thanx