Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

This response for Japan First is based on the 1986 Second Edition version and assumes No Russia Attack first round house rule. The allies should under no circumstance look to divert SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES (i.e. more than U.K.'s dollars to an India IC/tanks thereafter). If you send more dollars (U.S. IC, Russia support, etc), you are weakening the ...


0

Yes, all advice mentioned above explaining why Shuck Shuck should always trump other strategies is valid. Further to the point - U.K./Russia already start out with 4 fighters which placed with +20 infantry in Karelia will stand as significant defense (assumes UK keeps its fighter in India to delay Japan). The U.S. will also bring a fighter by round 2/3 ...


0

Agree with Kirt that U.S. must send most/all its resources into the Atlantic, simple math says Russia/U.K./U.S. dollar spend focused solely on Germany ensures Germany's upfront IPC advantage is quickly trumped and overtaken before Japan can mount enough pressure on Russia to relive pressure. Problem is I think Kirt has too often played weak Japanese players ...


1

No! Japan should do no such thing here's my opinion of the right Japanese first moves (assumes No Russia 1st rd. attack): 1) Assuming UK has built an IC on India Japan Build: 2 Transports, 3 Infantry Japan Attack: Pearl Harbor 2 battleships, 1 sub, 1 Aircraft Carrier, 1 fighter, 1 Bomber - the battleships can't free-shot since Manchuria hasn't been taken, ...


1

There is far greater spend then an IC in Australia (given it's remote location and subsequent need for transports to make an impact). 1) IC in India, just as temporary defense OR 2) all spend is UK focused with Fighters to defend Russia or Bombers to take away from Germany, and transports to support US shuck-shuck once they put a Battleship/Aircraft ...


1

Adam's and Scott's comments here are very sound, and both follow the logic of OPTIMAL allied play. I'm interested to hear from either of you if you've ever played against OPTIMAL Axis play as I define it (the reason is my group of friends have never successfully implemented optimal shuck-shuck and I always win as axis): Rd.1 Germany builds 10 infantry. ...


0

There is no middle-ground. The reality is assuming optimal Axis and Allied play the allies should always win as shuck-shuck should effectively weaken/spread German fronts before Japan can sufficiently bring the heat on Russia. The "Russia no first round attack" house rule is necessary to limit this Allied advantage by preventing the 3-5pts of additional ...


0

Germany SHOULD NEVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE FOLLOW DAN'S FIRST TURN PURCHASE OF 8 INFANTRY PLUS 1 TRANSPORT. Instead Germany should simply bring 2 infantry to support the starting 1 infantry 1 tank there and will now take Egypt Round 2 with 3 infantry PLUS 1 tank (can send a fighter for that battle as needed). The reason I am so confident in this play is ...



Top 50 recent answers are included