Can income be collected from contested areas? If yes, what if a neutral area is attacked but left contested.
No, contested areas do not generate income.
Offshore bombardment
The units destroyed by offshore bombardment fight back during the one round of combat?
The artillery destroyed by offshore bombardment fight bach in amphibious assault?
The artillery that fight back in a n amphibious assault fight in the round of combat also?
Offshore bombardment
The units destroyed by offshore bombardment fight back during the one round of combat?
The artillery destroyed by offshore bombardment fight bach in amphibious assault?
The artillery that fight back in a n amphibious assault fight in the round of combat also?
Yes, Yes, and Yes.
Are all fighters in a alliance in a single territory used to determine air superiority?
Is air combat to the death?
thanks
Kim
Are all fighters in a alliance in a single territory used to determine air superiority?
Is air combat to the death?
thanks
Kim
Yes, yes, yes!
Are all fighters in a alliance in a single territory used to determine air superiority?
Is air combat to the death?
thanks
Kim
On defense, yes. Offense, no.
Air combat is to the death.
Did we establish that in defence, victory in air combat promotes all defending artillery regardless of the fighter or artillery nationality?
Can you give an alternate/optional initial setup for Russia, especially for infantry? I am not really interested in rehashing the reasons for and against, but I will say that when playing it was too easy for the Central Powers to press into Russia while not being faced with a similar threat from Russia. Six infantry in the frontier territories is far too weak for Russia to have any chance of posing a challenge.
A strong A-H drive into Ukraine puts the CPs on the Russian doorstep far too quickly and thrashes the weak Russian economy too violently. So that is my question… what setup (for Russia) can I use to balance against this, in keeping with some of the game’s original design? This is regardless of playing with the RR rule in effect (or not). It would also keep the preexisting Central Powers setup on the Eastern Front. Thanks!
Can you give an alternate/optional initial setup for Russia, especially for infantry? I am not really interested in rehashing the reasons for and against, but I will say that when playing it was too easy for the Central Powers to press into Russia while not being faced with a similar threat from Russia. Six infantry in the frontier territories is far too weak for Russia to have any chance of posing a challenge.
A strong A-H drive into Ukraine puts the CPs on the Russian doorstep far too quickly and thrashes the weak Russian economy too violently. So that is my question… what setup (for Russia) can I use to balance against this, in keeping with some of the game�s original design? This is regardless of playing with the RR rule in effect (or not). It would also keep the preexisting Central Powers setup on the Eastern Front. Thanks!
Bolstering Russia, even slightly, would likely throw the game out of balance.
Maybe you could take away a starting French unit for each Russian unit you add to balance it.
Is the small space between Egypt and Trans-Jordan controlled by UK or Ottomans? Why isn’t it labeled and does it count for separate movement? ( meaning it takes two land moves to get to TJ.)
Did we establish that in defence, victory in air combat promotes all defending artillery regardless of the fighter or artillery nationality?
Yes. See page 14 of this thread.
@Imperious:
Is the small space between Egypt and Trans-Jordan controlled by UK or Ottomans? Why isn’t it labeled and does it count for separate movement? ( meaning it takes two land moves to get to TJ.)
It is part of Egypt. See page 11 of the Rulebook.
A quick question:
A German transport leaves SZ 10 empty and enters SZ 9. It picks up forces from Belgium to amphibiously assault the UK. I know the transport rolls for mines, but what happens if there is a hit? The forces picked up from Belgium go down with it or are they stranded in Belgium since the transport hit the mine entering the sea zone empty.
Rules as strict state that mines happen at the end of the move phase, which would of course mean after you have loaded your transports (which of course seems pretty silly).
Which a follow on question would be if you passed through a mined sea zone, then loaded and unloaded in an unmined sea zone but the transport hits a mine before it ever gets to the sea zone to load and unload.
Interesting situation. That never came up in playtesting.
If a loaded transport strikes a mine, any units that were loaded after the transport entered the mined sea zone are returned to the territory or territories they were loaded from. As the movement phase is over, they can’t move anywhere else. They’re just sitting on the docks waiting for a ship that will never come.
Interesting situation.�  That never came up in playtesting.
If a loaded transport strikes a mine, any units that were loaded after the transport entered the mined sea zone are returned to the territory or territories they were loaded from.�  As the movement phase is over, they can’t move anywhere else.�  They’re just sitting on the docks waiting for a ship that will never come.
Would it not be easier to just have the ships roll for mines immediatly upon entering the sea zone?
That was how we played it as we didn’t really read when you are supposed to roll for the mines. we just kind of consider it like aaa guns in WWII and did it first.
Kim
Interesting situation. That never came up in playtesting.
If a loaded transport strikes a mine, any units that were loaded after the transport entered the mined sea zone are returned to the territory or territories they were loaded from. As the movement phase is over, they can’t move anywhere else. They’re just sitting on the docks waiting for a ship that will never come.
I think if this is the case it needs an actual change and notation in the FAQ/Errata. The rules clearly state that you roll at the end of the move phase, after all movement is done. The cargo would already have moved by the time the mines take effect.
The UK needs to be shucking units into Karelia from turn 3 onwards. It can also move the Indian army north to support Sevastopol. If you can force the straits (KO the Turkish navy) then France can also contribute. Russia cannot survive alone against 3 enemies, but it isn’t intended to.
Can you give an alternate/optional initial setup for Russia, especially for infantry? I am not really interested in rehashing the reasons for and against, but I will say that when playing it was too easy for the Central Powers to press into Russia while not being faced with a similar threat from Russia. Six infantry in the frontier territories is far too weak for Russia to have any chance of posing a challenge.
A strong A-H drive into Ukraine puts the CPs on the Russian doorstep far too quickly and thrashes the weak Russian economy too violently. So that is my question… what setup (for Russia) can I use to balance against this, in keeping with some of the game�s original design? This is regardless of playing with the RR rule in effect (or not). It would also keep the preexisting Central Powers setup on the Eastern Front. Thanks!
Guys this is a Q & A thread (and we’ve all miss used it). I think you should make a thread about Russian strats that might include allied intervention. JMO, and I would definitely join in
I think if this is the case it needs an actual change and notation in the FAQ/Errata. The rules clearly state that you roll at the end of the move phase, after all movement is done. The cargo would already have moved by the time the mines take effect.
Read it again. There is no conflict with the rule.
