Convoy disruption question

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.

Ok miss read Krieg’s clarification on my highlighted section

The current rule is (Pacific rules, page 16): If an Allied player attacks Japanese units in or declares an amphibious assault from one of these sea zones, the Japanese player can announce at the beginning of this phase that he or she intends to launch one or more kamikaze strikes in that sea zone.  They are resolved before any combat begins.

So the status of any land territories adjacent to the kamikaze sea zones has no relevance.

The only time it didn’t work for me was when my dice went sour on G5 & G6 going into Russia, But the following week it worked and everybody was rolling better, I have yet to try it with the latest 3.9 rules. So much depends on good rolls at key battles and being able to work as an Axis team.

Another option, besides the CV buy, is to invest in bombers.

Do a strat. bomb on London G1 (with 2 bombers), and do another one with 2 + 2 on G2 (with a G1 buy of 2 bombers and whatever else your heart desires for 6 IPCs).

In my opinion, it’s the better option because once you’re through taking London, extra bombers are far more useful against the USSR than a carrier.

Ah, I recognize that philosophy:  “There are few submarine problems that can’t be resolved with a suitable application of depth charges”.

@aethervox:

Does Sea Zone 110 include the English Channel? I assume it does. However, it appears the English Channel could be considered sparate from Zone 110 - it certainly would give consideration to the Strait of Dover as a dividing line between the North Sea (zones 110,11 & 112) and the English Channel.

Yes.  SZ110 connects SZ104, 105 & 109 to 111 & 112.  There is no seperate English Channel Seazone.  The only Seazone that is currently unmarked (and should be numbered) is the Caspian Sea.

Plus Germany has a little extra incentive to make sure they keep it with the new NO.  Taking Norway and building an IC there won’t be the sure thing it’s always been up to now, but yes, if the US can pull it off it would be a major shift in power.