Why wait as Japan?

i’m even thinking bout a J4 attack
then you can take DEI, malaya, kwantung, phillipines, yunnan and perhaps a bit more in a round

J4 is too late IMO. I think attacking J3, or J2 if there is an opening, is the best route to go.

@Frontovik:

i’m even thinking bout a J4 attack
then you can take DEI, malaya, kwantung, phillipines, yunnan and perhaps a bit more in a round

I am in the middle of my first study game.  I took Yunnan in J1 and Szechwan in J3 killing the Flying Tigers.  I hope you are not waiting till J4 to attack Yunnan.  In this game, Japan was attacked by the UK on turn #2 and Japan took the PI, Kwangtung and Celebes on turn #3.

Either way, good luck.

i’m thinking out a new masterplan :D

already had one, but it failed (round 1 full attack, but after china and india fell Anzacs and US were to strong)

@Razor:

@Cruizer:

So back to the question, how can the allies do anything on the first turn but turtle and lose.

They can block. UK got 3 warships and ANZAC one, and if you move one ship into each sezone from Malya to New Guine, then Japan must end his move in this line. This will slow down his speed, and give the Allies time to regroup.

Except the British BB and transports are dead, along with the anzac destroyer/transport.    So UK has 2 warships.  Who cares about Malaya? Japanese do not get the +5 NO that the British do.  DEI worth more.

Allies would still outproduce and then proceed to smash you :)

yeah…it’s 7-0 japan in our games to date

Not my fault you guys are no good with allies :)

If you posted your Allied moves here and left them open to criticism, other people may be able to help you beat Japan. I’m curious as to what you are doing do counter J1 attacks.

yeah…it’s 7-0 japan in our games to date

We had our first Allied win yesterday. The Japanese player was too conservative early on and then split up his fleet later on and lost too much of it piecemeal. Allied play wasnt perfect either, but even with admitted Japanese mistakes it seemed VERY hard for the Allies.

Still, we learned some things as the Allies that we hope to exploit the next game when Japan doesnt make the same mistakes… :)

Yes, the abattlemap works well now, show us a map of the board after J1 if you do not mind MaherC, or even right before J2.

MaherC, what are you putting into the Philippines and is the U.S. player keeping the fighter in the territory or is he scrambling it? Attacking with 2 infantry, 1 artillery, and 1 tank, Japan should have about a 34% chance of taking the territory if the fig doesn’t scramble.

I see a lot of people mentioning the british taking the Dutch East Indies while they are still “neutral.”  This is not allowed as per the errata that is currently posted.  No neutral countries can attack other neutrals until japan attacks them.

I think you are mistaken.  The French and Dutch Territories are available to occupy in the beginning.  If the Japanese occupy a Dutch territory then that brings all the allies into the war.  However, I believe if the UK or ANZAC occupy a Dutch territory, the Japanese are allowed to attack that territory under the same circumstances as any other UK or ANZAC territory.  Check the stuff written about corrections to page 8, The Political Situation.

@Bridger:

I see a lot of people mentioning the british taking the Dutch East Indies while they are still “neutral.”  This is not allowed as per the errata that is currently posted.  No neutral countries can attack other neutrals until japan attacks them.

UK and ANZAC may take Dutch and French terittories.

From the Errata:

Page 8, The Political Situation: The first sentence of the second paragraph should read “If not yet at war, Britain and/or ANZAC are free to take control of Dutch and French territories (gaining their IPC income) by moving land units into those territories, as long as those territories have not been captured by Japan."

Yes, this is not considered to be an attack, and should be done during noncombat movement.

@Krieghund:

Yes, this is not considered to be an attack, and should be done during noncombat movement.

Krieghund,

Why in noncombat?

Is the purpose for noncombat move/take territory because Japan may have surface warships in the seazone of the Dutch territory UK and/or ANZAC is trying to take?

I thought I read somewhere (rule Q&A’s are long and spread out on the forum): Does UK/ANZAC have an agreement with the Dutch AND the French to take their territories? (Whereas Japan does not have that type of agreement?)

It’s done in noncombat movement simply because it isn’t an attack.  The Dutch and French are Allied powers whose capitals are held by the enemy (Germany).  As fellow colonial powers, the UK and ANZAC are simply taking taking guardianship of the territories.  The US may not take guardianship of these territories, as it has an isolationist policy and doesn’t want to get involved.  Japan, on the other hand, is an enemy power (allied with Germany), so it must attack these territories to claim them, and it must do so with the French territories before UK/ANZAC units arrive if it doesn’t want war with the remaining Allied powers.

I’m not really all that fired up to post the moves to a group who dumps negative feedback on me for posting my opinion on a game.  I obviously won’t “win you over” to my belief that the game is horribly unbalanced, because I haven’t been on these forums for years, I must not know how to play A&A.

@MaherC:

I’m not really all that fired up to post the moves to a group who dumps negative feedback on me for posting my opinion on a game.  I obviously won’t “win you over” to my belief that the game is horribly unbalanced, because I haven’t been on these forums for years, I must not know how to play A&A.

No, it is just that when you add more people you see more things.  It is far too early to cry imbalance is all we are saying.

Oh and we are not saying you don’t know how to play, we are saying the allied players in your group don’t know how to play  :evil: