Ruling Question

Locke888

Some people like simple some like complex….some like logic some like regimented rules

I agree with you…some are now calling it a National objective…I read it as non aggression pact in a political situation and that action is AGGRESSION. What I do know is I am not wrong…nor are people who agree with this move…this rule is simply left to interpretation…that’s all there is to it

No coincidence that there are so many house rules…why are they there? Because it is a great game and it has flaws and mistakes and rules that are not clear. I bet you there is not a player who plays this game who has not sat there and looked at a rule to go from section to section to get a clarification for at least 10 minutes during a game.

As for logic…if you are playing strategists…throw that out of the window…if you are playing historical folks…you can get somewhere…and then there is the in between and there you negotiate

@Charles:

4.  If your planes have any movement points left, they must try to land elsewhere.  If the planes have used their full movements and their carriers have been damaged, the planes are destroyed.  Ouch!

That’s in the case USA attacks.

If USA was on the defensive side (Japan attacks USA fleet in sz6) the planes are allowed 1 step to find a safe landing space, not 4. That can be an Allied-controlled territory 1 step away or an undamaged carrier with room to spare 1 step away. In this particular case : Korea or Japan (if Allies control it) or a carrier in sz5/7/16/17/18/19.

the rules ensure that the TTs cant really do double duty that way (you can use them twice but its not faster) though it is fun to imagine bringing along an extra transport during the US cross to load up those brave, brave, no-combined arms Frenchies from North Africa.  Or brits.  The rules just make it too choppy to implement very well.

A much better exploit is

flying into the attack with fighters u moved 4
landing them planes on an allied carrier, then it moves 3
then it gets attacked, you help defend, it blows up, you move 1 more

you moved 8 spaces with a fighter and fought twice in 1 turn lol

Yes, with 24 IPCs you can…

Add one infantry in UK, one in Scotland (makes Sealion hazardous and unlikely). More freedom to scramble on G1.

One infantry in Yunnan (dicey battle for Japan), one in Hunan (somewhat dicey battle) and 3 artilleries in the Russian far East territories (increases the punch of the 18 infantries there).

With bids higher than 24, Egypt can be reinforced further. Then there is the typical sub in 98 that people really like. Well placed land units are very hard to beat.

@simon33:

Airbases with 3 or more damage are not operational. Presumably this applies to rockets too.

I also read that they fire independently.

You are correct on both issues.

:-)

My mistake was not sending my two move units to Romania the previous turn as Germany. I just played out turn 9 and US was able to stack Northern Italy. Italy is out of the game now, but on the other side of the board Japan is making 105, and he is bombing Russia with 5 bombers every turn. He has more than UK in the south and he can now start landing in Africa taking the money away from Russia and UK. I do agree that US is going to eventually take Germany, but could he do it before Moscow falls? Probably :/

What I meant was that the owner can only use those abilities on their own turn. In contrast to scrambling, which can never occur on the base controller’s turn.

Sorry my wording got jumbled. I just wanted to point out why scrambling is not relevant to the rule Shaniana referenced.

@Krieghund:

As I have explained before, the reason Chinese movement is limited is to reflect the historical fact that China was also embroiled in a civil war (Nationalists versus Communists) at the same time that it was fighting the Japanese invaders.  As such, it had little interest in matters outside its own borders (keeping the Burma Road open for Allied aid being an obvious exception).  This restriction keeps China from influencing the game outside of its borders without having complicated rules to represent the impact of this conflict.

Don’t forget about the warlord factions!:)  Sure they were nominally supportive of Chaing but he had to keep a decent force back just to police his ‘allies’.