Scrambling from territory under attack

@shade840 said in pro neutral territories:

Example: allies attack Iraq, a pro axis neutral would that set off the true neutrals? appreciate ur help

No, an Allies attack on pro-axis Iraq affects the status of Iraq only.

@simon33
Thx for the answer!

Don’t worry though. Unless ANZAC or France happens to have some navy that can get there to protect those US transports, they will be sunk and all the UK units aboard lost on Germany’s next turn.

@Hepps01:

Yah, I agree with you.  Especially in the situation provided where there was literally 0% chance of success.  The sub attack was simply an “Offensive fodder” attack done to make the fighter move “quasi-legitimate”.

To me (on a personal level) the rules should stipulate that Carriers be required to move during the combat phase into the only potential landing zone and thus force the attacking player to win the secondary battle in order to ensure the fighter can land.  Otherwise this just enables people to do this kind of weak ass fodder tactic in order to get to the transports  that would otherwise be out of range.   This would then also mean that an attacker has to potentially sacrifice very valuable units (carriers) to accomplish these kind of delaying actions.

Just my opinion though.

From an emotional point of view I am with you here and as a fun fact in a current game I face exactly the ugly site of that move as he has Carrier plus sub in place which creates theoretical threats for all my transports. He can sac just a sub and then theoretically kill TTs in many seazones (for the price of saccing the Air of course).

However I like this rule because it gives the game some more dynamics and makes blocking a bit less powerful which I think is good for the game and does make you a bit less dependent on can openers and gives a power to overcome blocking at least a bit better without an allied power.

yukon and bc were combined into western canada.

Thanks for the quick responses!

@Eqqman:

@Cow:

It is why I hate ignoring sz 110 for my G1. Gibraltar merge is pimp with cruiser and bship on top to boot.

Doesn’t that just give a free pass of sorts to Italy?  They can wave goodbye to the Brits who are probably leaving to go deal with the Germans and use their nearly intact navy to get Cairo all the sooner.

Uk usually wont care about germany since he is not going sealion.  UK will easily stack 92 and be able to threaten the italian fleet where ever it goes.  (stacking 97 would be the best thing italy can do).

Assuming a J1 DOW and a Japanese fleet sitting on or around Hawaii, how many turns will it take for the US to neutralize Japan in the Pacific?  3?  4?  Its about the equivalent of waiting a few turns as Japan before the US can DOW.  The tradeoff is Japan gains very little economic advantage and just keeps the US busy in the Atlantic until Japan loses most of its fleet that it cannot replace.