UK combined forces question

@nolimit said in defending Sub question:

@commander-jeff 2, they retreat to One sz Area wherever any of the Transports came from- also the Units stay on the Transports!

To elaborate on this, the transports may retreat to a sea zone from which any of the original attacking sea units entered, so if the destroyer and/or sub actually entered from a different direction than the transports, that sea zone would also be valid for the retreat.

Also, if none of the sea zones from which any of the attacking units entered were friendly (they all started in enemy-occupied zones) or all of the attacking units were already in the contested sea zone to start with, no retreat would be possible and the transports would be automatically destroyed. Of course, in the latter case the attacking units could combat move out of the sea zone and then back in in order to establish a retreat route, assuming there were an adjacent friendly sea zone.

@Playing-Kid

Indeed that link points to an unrelated old document referring to the 1999 edition.

When on the AH-site better visit this place for the latest rules and FAQ:
https://avalonhill.wizards.com/rules

You will find the correct link to the 1940 2nd ed. FAQ there:
http://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/ah/aaeurope1940_2ndedition_faq.pdf

(Still not the latest version, that should be of November 2014, but you can go with it.)

Locke888

Some people like simple some like complex….some like logic some like regimented rules

I agree with you…some are now calling it a National objective…I read it as non aggression pact in a political situation and that action is AGGRESSION. What I do know is I am not wrong…nor are people who agree with this move…this rule is simply left to interpretation…that’s all there is to it

No coincidence that there are so many house rules…why are they there? Because it is a great game and it has flaws and mistakes and rules that are not clear. I bet you there is not a player who plays this game who has not sat there and looked at a rule to go from section to section to get a clarification for at least 10 minutes during a game.

As for logic…if you are playing strategists…throw that out of the window…if you are playing historical folks…you can get somewhere…and then there is the in between and there you negotiate

It could have been worded better IMO.

Thanks Krieghund, you explain it much better :)

oh thanks for the fast replys

and keep up the good work, alpha 3 looks really cool

ice

@cressman8064:

@Get:

can they build a Minor IC then upgrade it to a Major IC, since the rules do not state anything about upgrading it to a Major IC.

Upgrading a minor to major on foreign soil still counts as building a major, so with the new rules Korea is the only location Japan can build a major anywhere in the world.

Or Japan, assuming it falls and is retaken.

I’m currently playing a game which we borrowed some house rules from the previous poster in this thread. We are using tech tokens for 5 IPC’s each, but you can only purchase as many tech tokens as you have Victory Cities. You can purchase tech tokens, but may not take the rolls unless you are at war. So to start out the game Germany could buy 2 tech tokens. If they fail that first roll, then the next turn they could buy 1 more if they had taken out Paris. If not then they could only keep using the 2 they had left over from the previous turn. This version has taken away a lot of the luck aspect of tech which is nice. It also limits the amount of tech you can roll a turn so no power has an excessive amount. Small powers also have a harder time getting them.