Amphib attack and shore bombardments

Japan, of all the countries, has the most opportunities, units to take advantage of these opportunities, and time to attempt them.  These moves might cost them some of their planes, but those are expendable(start with NINE!) to further expansion as well as most easily replaced due to their range and relative low cost.

By mentioning time, Japan is isolated enough to be able to recover if their opening round attacks go poorly.

J1 Buy = 2 tpt, inf = 17/17

Combat:
2 inf (sz61) via sz61 tpt > brn *MT

CA,BB (sz61) > sz50 (dd, tpt)

inf (car) inf(oki) via sz51 tpt
2 inf (jap) via sz 62 tpt

3 inf, art (sz61) via sz61 tpts > bur (inf)

2 ftr (sz61) > sz35 (dd,tpt)
2 ftr (sz57) > sz56 (dd,tpt)
2 ftr (sz57), dd (sz51) > sz53 (BB)

However you want to attack China on the ground.  This is not the strongest push, but also not the weakest.
3 inf (man), inf (kia) > Sui (inf)
2 inf (kia), ftr (jap) > fuk (inf)
3 inf (fic),  ftr (for), ftr (man) > yun (inf,ftr)

@Lozmoid:

Even if those extra Fighters survive the battle and then have to crash into the sea?

Interesting stuff!  :-)

The thing is, you don’t know if those fighters will have to crash into the sea. They may end up on non-combat move without a valid landing spot but when you perform your combat moves there’s always a statistical change that the carrier will kill the 100 battleships (even though it should be about the same as you de-materializing while reading this message and materializing on the next room) thus the combat move satisfies the rule of a valid landing spot (regardless of how improbable it might be).

Combat moving 2 extra fighters to a battle goes against that same rule because there’s simply no possibility for those fighters to land during non-combat as they are moved (unless a carrier magically pops up out of nowhere into the middle of the battle board - odds for that happening should be the same as you teleporting yourself to another room) .

Since there was no sea battle in sea zone 12 and the destroyer did not participate in the amphibious assault, it did not participate in combat and is therefore free to move in noncombat movement.

I have seen a few Allied players skip the Flying Tiger attack. It is not a move I agree with. I will sacrifice Japanese planes I CAN REPLACE to take out that plane that can not be. It gives China a chance at offensive attacks and some defense.

I see no reason for Japan not to attack China. While killing all the Chinese troops in round 1 of a '41 game can be a bit of a stretch, the flying Tigers and some other territories should be attacked. While Japan may not want to spend the effort to totally eliminate China it is worthwhile to reduce them to just Chinghai. This way they can not produce any troops and are no longer relevant.

From the Allied side it is worth Russia’s troubles to send some forces to China to delay the Japanese. If China can be held to 2 or 3 territories they will produce free infantry and increase the amount of forces Japan has to commit for an advance through the central Asian front. In most games Russia will eventually have to retreat it’s forces as the Japanese become too numerous to hold out over China and its infantry, but again the whole idea was to delay Japan anyway. As far as other Allied liberations occurring these are very rare. Normally this will be done by the US and it will also normally be after all the high value UK territories and the Philippines have been liberated.

I would say just come to grips with the reality that China is a good idea badly implemented in AA50.

If you have $120 to spend, chances are you’ve won the game anyway.

Jennifer is correct.

@Elmo:

So, if the carrier was dependent on another battle to get to the pick-up zone, it would still be allowed?

Let’s say the British put their newly purchased navy in z2 on B1 but left a destroyer in z6. Then this couldn’t block my carrier (from z5 purchased on G1) getting to z3 to pick up fighters attacking z2 on G2, assuming I attacked the blocking destroyer?
Is this correct?

Yes.  You can declare the movement of the carrier through the cleared sea zone in noncombat movement in order to make the fighter attack legal.  If your fighters don’t survive the attack, you don’t have to move the carrier.  If you don’t sink the destroyer and can’t move the carrier, the fighters will be lost at the end of the turn.  If you sink the destroyer and at least one of your fighters survives, you must move the carrier to pick it up.

Builder_Chris is right, you won’t be able to hold africa without US assistance. if you left all of your african forces down there, you could slow them down for a couple of rounds though

if the US is going for all out Pacific, i would still try to convince them to use whatever they have in western usa in the african theatre to help. also, i always build an IC in india if japan can’t take it feasibly turn j2. this leaves you the option of sending tanks to africa once Japan is booted off China

Yes.  I didn’t state it correctly there.  The point is stacking up warships with the intent of Bombardment can be negated pretty easily with this rule.