How much can be bled? Convoy disruption question.

The following link might be of help:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30776.0

:mrgreen:

Okay……seems pretty obvious now I see. Thought I been very thorough reading up on things…evidently NOT!! Thanks

most nations, especially US and Italy should always strive go have at least one bomber threatening to deactivate an airbase or naval base.

US bomber usually aim for WGR AB while Italian bombers often have an eye on the Gibraltar Naval base (to leave US with only 2 space movement next turn) or AB London in case there is a fleet in 110 which depends on fighters scrambling from London.

@Celvus:

Thanks for the quick Answer Elrood! :-)

I Still find this Rule a little Strange. So the Allied Fraction just stands beside the Sea Fight watching the Battle and drinking some Beer?.  :|

Well, if that helps, imagine a vast seazone where the UK DD and Russian Sub are not in some battle group but actually far away from each other.  :-)

@Celvus:

Anyway since we play by the Rules we have to respect that. :-)

Good choice, there is nothing against house rules, but I would not mess with something integral like that. The befits of mixed fleets are already crazily good.

for example. UK / US fleets mass in SZ109 or 110. You think Berlin is save since you have a DD in SZ112 and few troops in Denmark, and have not many troops in Berlin (may be even none).
Then:
US fleet takes Denmark and after that UK goes into baltic sea and attacks Berlin, killing Germany most likely with that move. - Axis have no way to interact between US and UK moving… so its really nasty.

That happened to more than one inexperienced player, since it takes some time to “see” these possible scenarios.  :wink:
Just to let you see the possibilities

At that rate 1 hour = approx. 1 year.

Anyone use a chess timer or sand timer to keep the game moving?

@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.)

@gamerman01:

@Dark_Destroyer:

China can ignore the Neutrality rules?  I know China is a special case but… that doesn’t seem very logical.  The rules say you can move into those 2 spots… but doesn’t say you can ignore neutrality.

UK is not neutral.  She is at war with Germany and Italy.

But United Kingdom and India are 2 different powers.  The only thing they share are Techs.  United Kingdom can actually declare war on Japan and India still be Neutral…. ?

Read it nevermind lol, Uk can’t do that.  Another Illogical thing to add :(

end note  UK split = Nonsensical, really needed to do a better job at seperating the two.  When UK falls, India can not pick up IPC from fighting in the Middle East.  Very unreasonable.

@Bube:

Now if on the same turn your landing troops can the interceptors defend against the land after the SBR?

No.

@Bube:

If the airbase is damaged above 3 can defending planes still scramble on the same turn as the SBR (against the airbase)?

Yes.  Scrambling occurs before SBRs.