Technology rule question: Paratroopers

This question is rather ambiguous. If you’re attacking with aircraft only (no land units), it’s not an amphibious assault. If you mean, “Can I conduct an amphibious assault without cruisers or battleships for shore bombardment?”, the answer is yes, you can. When conducting an amphibious assault, you have to choose which aircraft will participate in any naval battle and which will participate in the land combat; they cannot do both. Any naval battle must be resolved before amphibious landings can take place.

@Mursilis said in [House Rules] The 20 IPC Question....:

@barnee
Well if you use the Tamvaan mode PLUS you make the cruiser cost 12, able to transport 1 infantry and A4 and D4 when paired with a BB you could balance out both germany and japan since you slightly buff the Soviets and anzac enough to counter Japan.

Yea I like the idea of taamvan’s mod because it doesn’t change much. I think I’ll make the NOs except for lenningrad a $3 option. Give some more flexibility with it.

Is that what you’re trying now ? My initial thought is that D4 might be too powerful, as my impression is the defensive fleet usually has the advantage.
I’ve never tried it though.

Only made it a couple rounds in my test game before I decided on another approach : ) so haven’t really got much action with A4.
Decided to let planes target capital ships before regular combat starts. Didn’t seem right that AA shooting at them and they just gotta take it heh heh.

Anyway, let me know if you want a triplea option for testing.
Rock On :)

Blitz is just a name for a first move “into a hostile, unoccupied territory”.  Page 27 of the pac rulebook.  Since your first move isn’t into a hostile territory, its not a blitz, Mr. Pain is correct, I believe.

Generally speaking powers defend together. However in G40 there are powers that start off neutral (Russia and USA) or not at war with each other (like Japan and UK/France). You could have a case at sea when you attack a sz with units from multiple powers, and can ignore the units that belong to a power that you aren’t yet at war with.

I think what also helped the USA in the Pacific was the type of war it was; wasn’t the majority of the Japanese land forces fighting in China? The USA could use their wealth of equipment and air-power to good use this way.

I like the idea of the different start-ups and scenarios and maybe more victory conditions for the Global Games.

I don’t think WW2 Axis & Allies games are dead either; I like the idea of more Theater type games as well like:
Eastern Front (have lots of territories; maybe make good use of rail-roads and blitzkrieg tactics etc… have extra "special infantry to represent the SS and other stuff)
Stalingrad would be cool…
Kursk would be cool…

Maybe some form of Atlantic Battles (subs vs convoys etc…)
Maybe some form of Battle of Britain (air battles) or some form of Bombing strategy game of the allies vs Germany (air battles).

I think there’s lots of games and ways they could still go.

No. It just stays there.

(Unless it is in a Chinese territory… then it is removed.)

@Gargantua:

if A RACK attacked a TURKEY from behind, would GREASE help? only if your RUSSIAN for food, and there’s no sense in STALIN. :P

Great play on words :P.

Very nice!

Unless you do G3 True neutral crush with attack on Turkey and Spain and sweden.