Liberating questions

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.

I believe about turn 7. Do keep in mind that of the 5 playing, I think only 2 of us have played A&A before and was years ago. So you cant follow too many textbook “should haves” as far as this goes.  :-D

calcutta is supposed to fall anyway, who cares.

At the end of each power’s turn they check to see if there are any enemy warships in convoy zones that border territories controlled by the power in question.  So, in your example, at the end of Italy’s turn, they would deduct up to 2 IPC from their income for the US sub present in z97.  They cannot lose more income than the total value of territories that Italy controls that border z97.  If Italy is under Allies control, the convoy disruption is irrelevant, because Italy does not collect income while it is enemy-controlled.  And the new controller would not lose income to a friendly unit (the US sub).

Then, on Germany’s turn, they would lose up to 2 IPC income for the US sub in z97.  Again, they can’t lose more than the total value of German controlled territories bordering z97.

So, essentially, the US sub is doing convoy disruption to BOTH Italy and Germany as long as they both control territories that border z97.

The rules specifically state on page 34 that UK NO IPCs go to the Europe economy, and there is no provision in the rules for any IPCs to be transferred between the two economies under any circumstances.

thanks. you are right.
Quote from AAP40 rule book page 13 “In addition, one mechanized infantry unit can move along with each blitzing tank.”
the mec and tnk must be paired and move to same destination as a pair.

@Krieghund:

During your Collect Income phase, check for any convoy sea zones that are adjacent to territories that you control and that also contain warships (not transports) belonging to powers with which you are at war.  For each such sea zone, first add up the total IPC value of the adjacent territories that you control, giving you the maximum number of IPCs that you can lose in that zone.  Then, add up the total number of enemy warships (submarines count as two) to get your potential losses in that zone.  Finally, subtract whichever of those two numbers is lower from the income you collect.  Repeat this process for each eligible sea zone.

Example:  Italy controls Southern Italy, Northern Italy, Yugoslavia, and Albania, and there are two UK submarines in sea zone 97.  The total IPCs controlled by Italy adjacent to sea zone 97 is 10.  The two subs can destroy 4 IPCs.  Since 4 is less than 10 (the damage done is less than the maximum that the sea zone can sustain), Italy subtracts 4 IPCs from the income it collects.

but say, greece has 2 adjacent convoy zones, can greece lose 4 IPC?
i thought no, but not sure. wouldn’t be very logical
and what if german has greece and yugolavia, and US puts subs in adriatic sea. do they do convoy damage to germans and italians at same time?

Yes, they border