Technology rule question: Paratroopers

@Caesar:

@ShadowHAwk:

@RedIndian:

Ok here are another 3 :D

USA : (US in first 3 rounds when not at war)

Beside the “No-China-Rule”
Are any ships and airplanes of the US allowed to go through seazones which are adjacent to Japan controlled islands? Yes, aren’t they? Unless they don’t park there/ end the movment adjacent to a Japan controlled island or territory, right?

I found this a bit weird rule as it also bars US from staging ships near singapore which is a major naval base for the UK.
But the rules are the rules :)

It is clear the US cannot attack before turn 4 without being attack is G40’s attempted to get AnA closer to historical actions. US was big about Monroe Doctrine. The bigger question is why USSR cannot attack before Turn 4. I know it’s about the pact between Stalin and Hitler but anyone with a brain knew Stalin was going to attack eventually.

I don’t know why you focus on that now but I will give you an answer.
Stalin’s plan was to wait until all the other powers have weaken each other, so that the USSR is able to conquer the world easily. (he said this on a party meeting of the communism in the 20’s)
Anyone who still says the USSR was nearly or ready to attack the Germans by 1941 is a liar!
The Russians weren’t ready (just had their “great purge”) at all. And as I said, they wanted to wait until there would be a chance later on!
So to me the rule does make sense. It makes it more historical. And if Germany invades & conquers UK, you have the chance to declare war. (this covers Stalin’s plan to wait, although no one know what happened if…)

For the Pacific, the USSR was interested in getting their territories back they had lost years ago against Japan.
But they weren’t strong enough at this time to do this without any help. The navy of the Russians in the Pacific wasn’t strong enough to face the Japanese.

Since 1932 there were several boarder conflicts between USSR and Japan in the north of Mandchuko. Finally in April 1941 both countries signed the  “Soviet�Japanese Neutrality Pact”.
Although many Allied partners of those both countries tried to push them into war with eachother (US the USSR against Japan / Germany Japan against Russia), they never came into war. (Russia needed the troops for Europe, Japan against China, US and all the other pacific campaigns)
Ok at the very last days Russia took some territories but only after all other combats in Europe were done!

So as a German I can give you the advice, be careful what you’re saying. This argument pushed by other nations until 1980s / 1990s justified the attack of the Germans in June, 22 1941. As some of the German Veterans say. Those people were told this, just to make this attack a right and justified one. They (Nazis) even said, this was a defending attack, although it was planned by Hitler for other purposes. Anything else is “Propaganda” or in Trump’s days “fake news”

Historians from different nations proofed this.

So no, Stalin doesn’t want to attack Germany that early! Maybe later, but there are no concrete hints for that in comparison to the Nazis.

yes

I’d like to see the paratroopers rule go towards the more familiar one where you tie up a bomber and you have to drop the paratrooper in the first territory you get too with a defending unit - cant be dropped on VCs.

but yes, my understanding is the same as Veqryn’s currently.

PS: No, I thik if you have 14 bombers, you should be able to send 14 paratroopers and do all paratrooper attacks too.  I’ve gotten paratroopers in the game and had them become the truning point between me losing and me going on to win.    Nothing like picking up 3 IPC because it’s undefended useless land.

3 spaces left to land, it’s only 1 when you’re defending.

thanx for clearing that up for me

I thought they had to be at war with japan too

I see the logic now that uk and dutch are at war with germany makes them buddies

@Zallomallo:

@Zcion:

Quick clarification:

in before mentioned case, UK income 8+5 from NO, 4 ger subs in sz109 and 1 in sz119.
would uk loose 8 or 10 ipc due to convoy disruption?

afaik you cant convoy disrup NO?

many thx
Zcion

Correct, disruption is capped by the surrounding territories’ income.

Well, it’s capped by the total value of each convoy zone’s adjacent spaces, which can technically exceed income collected from those territories.  But you’re correct in that disruption does not affect National Objectives or at least does not affect the 40 on West US.

However, I’m not certain of the timing of convoy vs objectives and whether convoy disruption affects total income after objectives are collected.  Convoys can only affect values of territories, but since they can exceed income you’d collect from territories (by the double dips similar to 109/119), I don’t know whether than can dig a little into objectives.  Based on the Pac40 west US errata, it would seem no but this is not specifically addressed by the errata, which clarified that WUS was not worth 40, it was only worth 10, and could only be blocked up to 10.

So, as long as britain is making an additional 2 ipcs income through other territories, if sz109 and sz119 are fully blocked, Britain will lose 10 ipcs (8 for 109 and 2 for 119).  If Britain is making less than 10 IPCs in income before national objectives, they collect 0 for those their territorial income, and then collect national objective ipcs.

However, it’s VERY rare indeed that the UK does not still collect from an african or canadian territory that would put its territorial income over 10, in which case, if sc109 and 119 are fully blocked, they lose 10 IPCS.

@Detuite:

#6 Can german fighters in southern italy scramble in defence of the italian fleet off the coast.

If you’re playing Alpha+.1, yes.  If you’re playing by the box rules, no, as planes may only scramble from island airbases.

thanks krieg. my head was starting to hurt