From: keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A: Allies buy how many dice?
Date: 14 Oct 1992 10:01:18 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

barich@bach.udel.edu (Dewey H Barich) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>>>if taking back is the right wording.  It's hard to take back that which
>>>you never lost.  It all depends on the players and the strategies.
>>
>>I am assuming that Germany has transported over at least two infantry to
>>Africa, which should be enough to cause German domination at least for a 
>>few turns.

>OK, you are making assumptions.  Some people take the battleship and
>transport to kill the one infantry left in Cacausus (if that is the
>case).  Assumptions need to be known.  I, too, take some units to
>Africa, but not all the time.  What if the UK took the majority of its
>units to India?  Then you can quite possibly make better use of the units
>by keeping then in Europe.

I have seen people move things to Cacausus this way.  The only time that
it would be worth it to do so, though, would probably be if Germany
were attacking Karelia on the first turn (and expected not to lose the armor),
which doesn't happen that often.

Since German moves before the UK, the UK will not be able to move any units
to India before Germany moves.  I am assuming that the German transport will
die (probably by an allied bomber) very soon (so that Germany won't be
able to transport mote units for a while).

>>Well, the US fleet certainly wouldn't be doing "nothing" if it moved into
>>the Atlantic.  I'm assuming that Japan has attacked the Hawaii seaspace,
>>anyway, so there is not really a US fleet.  Time is of the essence.  Island
>>hopping is not the way to make the best use of it.

>Again, depends.  If the fleet was attacked, then the battleship and
>transport are all that's left, assuming they did not die in a
>counter-attack or did not participate in one.  If that's the case, then
>the battleship and transport will not be able to do anything for 3 turns
>(or so) against the Germans, nor will they be of great use against the
>Germans.  I think that they would then be of more use hampering the
>Japanese, thus keeping the Japanese navy (perhaps) from being so
>effective against the Asian coast.

Well, the original point was whether or not it would be a good idea for the
US to move into the atlantic with the fleet, and whether it would be a good
idea for Japan to try to stop this by attacking Hawaii.  If the Japanese
do attack Hawaii, the US can either strike back (using some planes and the
rest of the navy), or it can move the fleet eastwards, perhaps luring the
Japanese navy to follow (which will really keep the Japanese navy out of the
action for a while).

>>I don't see Japan having enough force to keep Mexico a whole turn, unless
>>the US player is pretty oblivious to what is going on.  After Japan would
>>land, it'd be crushed by the US forces, and the the fleet would have to
>>go back and pick up some more men.  This will take quite a while.

>I said take Mexico IF there was nothing that could reach the units
>there.  Otherwise, forget it.  If you do take it, then the US should
>respond by putting something in the West US.  Then, on your next turn,
>leave.  It's that simple.  It gets you a total of 4 IPCs and keeps the
>US from getting 2 (following the turn you took it).  This, in turn,
>eases (slightly) the burden on Germany.

Well, the tanks can move two spaces, and will probably be able to take back
Mexico quickly (especially if there are some planes around too).  I don't
often like to leave the West US totally open, either.  This prevents dumb 
mistakes like allowing Japan to sneak in an infantry to the West US on 
a transport from somewhere.

>>There are some pretty interesting things that Japan can do.  Attacking
>>the US, however, doesn't seem very effective, from my experience.

>Again, it all depends.  I certainly would not try a large offensive, it
>is far too easy to see it coming and prepare.  But, the US player may
>very well ignore one transport that can reach Mexico...

>It's even possible that you could land in the West US and find the US
>player having trouble taking it back (not likely, but not unheard of,
>either).

>Overall, I'm simply saying I think you generalize a little too much.
>The things you say remind me of the players who say "Germany must build
>ALL armor!!!! -- it's the only way."  All I am trying to say is that
>these types of statements just don't stand.

Well, I've found that Germany does best if it builds all infantry.  It is silly
for Germany to attack Russia unless it can save most of its armor.  If it
can't, then the expensive armor usually becomes fodder.

keith

Newsgroups: rec.games.board