Fact Finding Mission 2

@Cmdr:

Interesting points.

I do notice that sea zones, at varying differences between games, seem to be either more or less friendly than land zones can be when determining flight ranges.

I think, in regards to Europe, the map lines up pretty well with the rules (in the current rendition of the game).  I think in classic it does not line up as well.  Just my two copper pieces…

Then the US figs and Tac Bombers should get to move 6 after T5 or 6

@Gargantua:

I noticed that through all the media, the hype, the advertising, and the online discussions, that no one is mentioning “Dumb and Dumberer”, like it’s some forgotten plague.

Anyone have any comments on that?

Yeah… where the heck did Ebola go? Must hibernate for Christmas…

ask Santa.

mnnnn I don’t think so.

68 views but only 5 votes and 1 comment,  :cry:

Nah! You’ve got more important things to do. :o

Who said that?!?!
:)

You are obviously spreading your wisdom in other places.
Excuse me. I have to go put on my hipwaders. :wink:

I’m sorry, but just slapping a tailhook on a Bf109 would not make it a viable carrier plane. The 109 had a light airframe & very strong torque at low airspeeds–not to mention its notoriously weak landing gear arrangement. It was difficult enough to take off & land a Bf109 from land bases–IMO it would be nearly impossible at sea. Upon hitting an arresting wire a 109 would probably just disintegrate–that is if it didn’t flip over onto its back first! The 109 was a buckin’ bronco & would probably have had to have been either completely redesigned or replaced by another aircraft better-suited to naval duty. Perhaps a modified FW190, but probably an all-new design…

JMO

Ozone27

exactly
:lol: