Tech questions

UK cannot land there because they did not own it at the beginning of their turn. US comes after them in the order.
You found the relevant rule and quoted it.

I’ve been lurking these forums for a bit and finally decided to join up. Anywho, just played the first A&A50 game in like 2 years a few weeks ago. Everyone went for techs. By the end of the game Japan had Radar, America had Heavy Bombers, and Russia had both Advance Artillery and war bonds.

We ended the game on German 4 when they took Moscow. America only used Heavy Bombers once, likewise Japan only used Radar once(same combat), and Russia despite having two techs still got crushed by combined German/Japan Moscow rush.

So the question is, in the long run are the techs worth the investment?

Personally I like having the options though I don’t normally bother are only buy like one tech dice a game. Still when people do get them it can have a great impact in some games, I’ve seen a G2 Sea lion a couple of times because of techs. From reading the forums most seem to favor ignoring them, but I just wanted to get a few options and see how most felt.

Short answer: Yes

Long answer: Yes you can  :-D

Although I have only played a few games of AA50 a few things seem clear regardless of the scenario:

1. Chinamen vaporize faster than the humans In War of the Worlds…for a 1940 population of 455mil you have a better chance of finding a brontosaurus on the map by turn 3, possibly by turn 2 with the 41 scenario. Perhaps the spawn policy should be changed…maybe 1 for every 2 terr rounded up.

2. He/she who controls the Gaza strip rules the world…the strip between Egypt and India plays a major role in deciding the game. If this is in allied hands the russians can usually hold the Caucases… if not their position is tenuous. conversely,

3. Germans cannot live on a diet of sauerbraten alone… a little linguini and sushi help the digestion (of Russia) If the russian player is good I think it is difficult to do it with Germany alone. Just as russia need to hold out until the allies arrive Germany only needs to hold the front with/without  Italy’s help until you can get double/triple penetration on cau/rus with Japan.  Italy can either support france freeing the huns for eastward movement or shuttle thru Istanbul  Btw, I think closed Dardanelles is for pussies.

4. NOs…I don’t know. The axis NOs are more easily obtained but I certainly like the extra 5 I get in russia for no foreigners as it lets me squeeze an armor in here and there.

5. Pocket change…whenever I have a few extra scheckles I find myself buying subs particularly in a no tech game.  Its like a boxer with a good jab. keeps the Japs out of the Americans face, also good for the Med.

6. Advantage who…are the axis really favored???  I am currently plaing a gencom rules game where axis recieved a bid. Maybe this is to offset the allied VC
advantage with an 8 turn / 6 hour limit  an no NOs    I’d like to know peoples thoughts on who is favored and why

After further consideration I no longer feel the fighter escort/interceptor rule needs any fine tuning. In my previous posts I expressed the view that the rule nerfed strategic bombing too much but I’ve since changed my mind. After all, bombing raids over inland German targets without escorts was near suicidal, especially during the daylight. It wasn’t until the Allies had deployed long range escort fighters and had outnumbered the defending Luftwaffe aircraft, that the Allies were able to conduct bombing missions without terrible loses. The same is true with the fighter escort/interceptor rule as it stands now and it should stay that way.

dang.

I believe it though…

So Italy really wasn’t a large factor? Did they conquer all of Africa? What were their builds?

Italy built 1 trs and 1 CV and then mostly land units, adding 1 DD later on. Africa wasn’t important, Germany sent a tank down there which manoeuvred to avoid 2 UK infs (landings in West Africa were not done but probably would have been a good idea). Italy was a factor in that it distracted from attacking the Germans and I think a balanced approach by the US and the UK is probably more effective, i.e. landing in both Norway and Algeria, having fleets both in North/baltic sea and West Med, SBR against both Germany and Italy, and this necessitates a lot of US involvement.

For such things as India IC, this is a detail which o/c we just have to try and fail to see if it can be held, more than 4-5 rnds?

In this game there was no India IC, India survived because Japan focused on China and Australia. In an other game an IC was built and defended with the help of some Russian troops but the jury is out on if this really is viable if the Japs really go all-out vs. India. I hope there’s more UK ships to start with since that would make defending a built IC so much easier! We’ll see very shortly when we get the UK set-up.