Right or wrong that is the rules Strategic Bombing ?
Is it OK, if i have 3 bombers, and SB the UK, and i roll 4 + 6 + 6 then UK lose total 16 that round
http://www.wizards.com/avalonhill/rules/axis2004.pdf
During the opening fire step, an enemy antiaircraft gun fires on each attacking bomber. Any bombers that survive may attack the industrial complex. Roll one
die for each surviving bomber; however, each bomber can inflict no more IPC loss than the territory’s income value. The opponent must surrender that
many IPCs to the bank (or as manys the player has, whichever ishe greater amount).
FAQ http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/faqs/axisrevised#bombing
IPC loss from strategic bombing is limited to the territory’s income value. Is that per bomber or per turn?
Per bomber.
Hello there,
I believe there is a topic on this subject already: An introduction and a question about Strat. bombing
I do not know where this “per bomber” thing is coming from…
But, SBR’s of whatever type can do a maximum of hte value of the territory being attacked per round (i.e. per nation’s move).
Ths UK can do a maximum of 16 IPCs to Germany in UK’s turn (10 to Germany, 6 to Southern, assuming no new IC’s for Germany).
And the USA can repeat that in THEIR turn.
And of coruse Russia could also… if somehow they were buying bombers and/or rockets.
So, the maximum SBR damage to Germany in 1 full turn is 48 IPC’s… 16 each from UK, USA, and USSR.
If you check all of the online dicey’s, you will find this is how it is rolled… and I believe Larry Harris Tournament Rules also clarify the SBR thing from the BS in the printed manual (which is TOTALLY wrong)
@ncscswitch:
I do not know where this “per bomber” thing is coming from…
…
It’s coming from the official Avalon Hill website FAQ’s for Axis and Allies Revised. The original rule is broken. The fix is broken. They have been so for years now.
AH will not fix their broken rule set. Bleachh…
BW
Which is why those of us who game seriously use LHTR :-)
i don’t want to annoy people, but there is a thread where this has already been discussed:
(sorry)
An introduction and a question about Strat. bombing
Thart right, the other therd is almost the same :), let stop this thead and use the other… “An introduction and a question about Strat. bombing”
