Quick question

yes

Our group has had this discussion many times. It seems unrealistic that a country would develop something that is not useful.  In one of our games Russia bought a non-disposable tech dice and actually rolled a 6 then rolled on the chart and got “War Bonds” which was cool for them but if you look at the list there are very few that Russia can benefit from.  Mostly depends if they are on the offensive.  If they are on the defensive then only “War Bonds” and “Increased Factory Production” seem to be worthwhile.  “Radar” would also be good but its on a separate chart with tech that would not benefit them.  Most would say that Russia should not even consider rolling on tech and I tend to agree unless they are on the offensive and have a massive economy.

Unfortunately it’s not clear in the rules, but that’s been corrected in the second edition.  The same principle applies to destoyers cancelling submarines’ abilities - once the destroyers are gone, the subs regain their abilities in the next combat round.

AA guns can’t load in Combat Phase.

Believe me…

You can load them in NCM a turn before, and choose NOT to unload, then choose to unload in a future non combat.

@Omega:

When one scramble for defense, can you decide to back after one round of fire? (as the defender_

Urgent, we stopped playing -.-

Asked and answered in the FAQ thread.

You cannot retreat as the defender for any reason.

@WILD:

I think that if the the allies were allowed to just NCM in to take control of a fallen allied powers tt’s (collect the income) it would swing to much income to the allies and break the game. Plus if your getting paid for all those tt’s why would you Liberate your former allies capital (kinda like how Paris is now). It is better to leave things as they are and they only get paid if they liberate them from the enemy. That makes a pretty good cat & mouse game of how much tt the axis want to take vs how many of them they will be able to hold later on.

Â

If that were the case, then I feel the Axis original TTs should be worth double to Axis powers only.  Sort of like the Russian NO, but reversed.  But yes, I concur with your analysis, in-so-much in regard to Dutch/Netherlands.

I always viewed that rule as a way to not automatically give the income to England but not deny it to Japan either.  It really only plays in the Pacific campaign, as your only chance to get the income is to invest enough to push Japan out (otherwise, Japan will crush any resistance and take it.)

No.  Transports may not be loaded (or unloaded) in a hostile sea zone.

No, they can also be used in regular sea battles.