Russia: Add a bomber to Karelia, remove the factory there
UK: Add 2 infantry to India
US: Remove 1 transport from sz 11, but make US gain a full turn of non-combat moves
This will help the US preserve some of its starting fleet, save some of the troops in China, make Russia a little stronger vs Germany and help the UK hold India for longer. Thoughts?
I didn´t know where to post this, so I just picked this category, feel free to move it somewhere else if needed.
If you are trading territories with an opponent, who has one infantry in a territory worth one ipc, how many infantry would you send in along with your planes? (one or two?) If there are three infantry in a territory, I generally don´t send in more than three infantry myself, depending on how many planes I got. Another rule of thumb I have figured out is that if the territory is worth 2 ipc or more, I send in that extra infantry needed to secure a capture (if everything hits first round).
When is it beneficial to trade? Are there situations where trading simply should be avoided?
Russia: Add a bomber to Karelia, remove the factory there
UK: Add 2 infantry to India
US: Remove 1 transport from sz 11, but make US gain a full turn of non-combat moves
This will help the US preserve some of its starting fleet, save some of the troops in China, make Russia a little stronger vs Germany and help the UK hold India for longer. Thoughts?
From the rulebook about submarines:
Does Not Block Enemy Movement: The “stealth” ability of submarines also allows enemy ships to ignore their presence.
Any sea zone that contains only enemy submarines does not stop the movement of a sea unit. Sea units ending their combat
movement in a sea zone containing only enemy submarines may choose to attack them or not. Sea units can also end their
noncombat movement in a sea zone containing only enemy submarines.
About transports
Any sea zone that contains only enemy transports doesn’t stop the movement of a sea
unit. Air or sea units (other than transports) ending their combat movement in a sea zone containing only enemy transports
automatically destroy those transports (unless they are ignoring them to support an amphibious assault instead). This counts
as a sea combat for those sea units. Sea units can also end their noncombat movement in a sea zone containing only enemy
transports.
If I interpreted this correctly, a seazone containing both submarines AND transports blocks the movement of sea units. This doesn´t make any sense.
Do submarines have the ability to protect allied transports? (obviously not from air units) Can you ignore making an attack on a seazone containing transports and submarines to make a seashore bombardment?
Is it recommended that you attack zeasone 14 with 2 submarines, aswell as taking an infantry unit to land on gibraltar? This would destroy the brittish fighter, but since you will most likely lose your transport (and destroyer if you move it in to protect the transport).
Is it recommended to make a gamble and attack seazone 11 with just one submarine? I have previously played the 1942 version of the game and it got an exellent game guide for Germany, but I´m not sure what types of strategies you should try as Germany in this version of the game.
Cruiser:
Costs: 12 ipc
Defend at a 3
Moves 2 spaces, only at sea
Can bombard during an amphibious assault which allow it to attack for only one round of combat if you are unloading troops into an unguarded seazone, cannot be taken as casualty when attacking land
Fighter:
Costs 10 ipc
Defend at a 4
Moves 4 spaces, both on land and at sea (often times it can only reach 3 territories away)
Can attack any territory it wants, for as many rounds as it wants and can be taken as casualty when attacking land
I really don�t understand why they put cruisers in the game at a price of 12, when you can buy a fighter that does almost everything better at a lower price.
I have played alot of games as the allies recently and in almost every single game, I have lost Egypt at a G2 attack. In one game (the latest game I played), I bought a factory on UK1 and hoped to change that around. I still had to invest a TON in order for Egypt to hold for the second round and I quickly realized that even though I managed to hold of Egypt, the cost was to great.
It simply feels like the game is completely lost when Germany takes Egypt at the second round. From my perspective, there seems to be an extremely important triangle in the game (Egypt, Moscow, India) that the allies REALLY need to hold, if they lose one of these parts of the triangle, the game is over. While when playing as the allies, the only thing I really try to do is defend these points, which sooner or later will break.
This is roughly my idea.
+2 infantery in India
+2 infantery in Egypt
Remove Japan´s destroyer (or transport) in SZ 61
Move US cruiser from SZ 19 to SZ 11.
Thoughts?
I also have a slight question, how do you seperate cruiser hits from fighter hits? If I attack with 2 fighters and 2 cruisers vs 2 subs and 2 cruisers and in the firts roll I roll 3 hits, how can you be sure which one of the attacker hit?
Same scenario if you attack an aircraft carrier with fighter plus 2 destroyers with destroyers and subs, how do you know which hit were made by the subs or destroyers? Can I chose to say that the sub were the ones who made the hit to force my oponent to take something other than his planes.
Me and my friend usually just take away casualties after each group of units have hit (not according to the rule book) but if we were to play according to it, then the situation would get even worse.
From the rulebook about anti aircraft artillery.
It can, however, be taken as a casualty. If a territory containing AAA units and no combat units is attacked,
the AAA units are automatically destroyed.
What does this mean, my friends and I are unsure about it.
Option 1: Anti-air craft each have 1 hp and can be place behind the casualy stripp. If this is the case where would you place it along the battle stripp.
Option 2: Anti-air craft are lost when there are no other defending units and only then.
Which option is true?
I had an idea where you were continuously sending fighters from the uk to west russia, from there some of these fighters were going to defend Egypt. My primary thought was going after Japan and ignoring Germany. How does this work?