India should be your target.

I still don’t see anyone posting a good Japan strategy.  I’ve got one in my bag of tricks, but would hate to spoil everyone’s fun.

Global +3 is pretty well balanced from my experiences playing it tableside.

Whats the confusion over scramble?

I disagree with Jennifer’s conclusions.  There’s a lot of room for strategic maneuver and thinking… I find it difficult to believe that your rapid fire forums games versus single opponents explores every tactical possibility.

Rolls: 10@1 1@4; Total Hits: 410@1: (3, 1, 5, 2, 1, 6, 3, 1, 1, 2)1@4: (5)

Rolls: 1@1; Total Hits: 01@1: (6)

I disagree.

USA needs the income or they’ve got no hope of stopping Japan from winning the game in the Pacific.  Particularly with Larry’s latest setup, the game is properly balanced for USA to be starting at 52.

J1 is the right move for Japan using OOB.

But why play OOB.  It’s unbalanced.

Quick question!

With the rocket tech, can an AA gun fire during the combat phase and then move up during non-combat?

Also, can multiple AA guns fire rockets at the same industrial complex?

I believe the answer to both of these is YES, but would like to double check.

I think the worst thing you could do with a game of this scope is haphazardly jump in and start trying balance changes when you haven’t really played enough games to have a good baseline to gauge the effectiveness of your changes.

The amphibious assault must happen during the conduct combat phase, so the answer is no, you cannot do that.

You could, however, sink the Jap destroyer during combat phase and on movement you could move the transport through that sea zone to Japan, but they would not be able to attack.

History is irrelevant.

We are trying to balance a board game.

Sooner everyone can accept that, the better off we’ll all be.