I realise, thank you Gamerman. Never expected to be a 1. Was a shock.
I know my limitations, make errors and play very conservatively.
I am unable to think out of the box and know many players moves would throw and confuse me.
Sleazy exploitation of rule:
Park UK dd off Hainan amidst Japanese fleet to prevent from loading J2 or 3.
The US is precluded from moving dd next to J terr. UK and Anzac should also be restricted.
@wittmann:
I realise, thank you Gamerman. Never expected to be a 1. Was a shock.
I know my limitations, make errors and play very conservatively.
I am unable to think out of the box and know many players moves would throw and confuse me.
beware this humble wittmann… :wink:
Sleazy exploitation of rule:
Park UK dd off Hainan amidst Japanese fleet to prevent from loading J2 or 3.
The US is precluded from moving dd next to J terr. UK and Anzac should also be restricted.
It’s a nice trick not every player knows about and should stay. This, strafing and some crazy naval moves giving ships one more range are examples of differences between good and excellent players.
Besides, the Japanese player can easily bypass this by already loading the units before (or not unloading them).
The move you describe requires the UK to not declare war, and ANZAC to declare war, so it is not without its costs.
UK cannot collect NO, and ANZAC makes unprovoked DOW on Japan, keeping USA out. And as Roboto said, there are things you can do. Like not leaving a mass of transports all in one place and counting on them to be able to load. It is sleazy, and Wheatbeer pulled it against me is how I found out. But he paid a price, and it was more gimmicky than anything.
Oh, you also are forfeiting a UK destroyer - even if it hits the Japanese just absorb it without loss
The move you describe requires the UK to not declare war, and ANZAC to declare war, so it is not without its costs.
UK cannot collect NO, and ANZAC makes unprovoked DOW on Japan, keeping USA out. And as Roboto said, there are things you can do. Like not leaving a mass of transports all in one place and counting on them to be able to load. It is sleazy, and Wheatbeer pulled it against me is how I found out. But he paid a price, and it was more gimmicky than anything.Oh, you also are forfeiting a UK destroyer - even if it hits the Japanese just absorb it without loss
Actually no allied DOW is necessary. If Japan does an unprovoked DOW, the sea zone becomes hostile before the combat move and (by the rules) prevents the load although TripleA will allow it.
Yes, a Japanese player that expects it can just keep the tt’s loaded - if they know about it. It is gimmicky and a bit sleazy, but I’m not above using it myself so long as it exists so meh. Although I’d feel much better about using it if there was a clear example about that scenario in the rules.
Be aware that TripleA does allow Japan to load and move tt’s in this scenario, so if you pull it on an unknowing newbie and they just load/move out of it, expect a long debate and maybe some bad blood with rolling back that turn.
Caveat: Karl did just pull this stunt on me. I sort of knew about it but never seen anyone actually do it, so I’d count myself as unsuspecting rather than unknowing. I walked into it so it’s my own fault. No worries, my Japan game needed a little creativity anyhow.
…and he did just trap a sizable Japanese force on the mainland that he has to deal with - heh
No, there is an exception for when you first declare war. See page #12, blue side bar, last part of first paragraph.
This sleazy move requires an unprovoked DOW by ANZAC
Well Golllly - there it is in black (blue?) and white :)
That explains it pretty clearly - my post was wrong but now I understand the in’s and out’s of it.
I guess that’s why you’re the Rules Deputy - heh.
I use this move in, say, half of my games and it’s working very, very well for me. I don’t expect this to be the case for much longer since every player I use it on is one player less not knowing this trick.
The price I pay is ok, since US doesn’t lose the bonus IPC for being at war, and I usually want to declare war in the second round anyway. So all I am giving up is a UK destroyer (usually used for blocking anyway) and MAYBE 5 bonus IPC for UK (more often than not, good Japanese players are placing subs anyway at kwangtung, borneo, malaya - declaring war will result in +5 IPC from NO Bonus, but more than 5 IPC lost due to convoy). What I get is one more round of Allied DEI+Malaya, which is huge.
If can opening is not a sleazy exploitation, I cannot foresee anything being considered a sleazy exploitation. :lol:
It’s a good move. ATM I am trying to figure out how to deal with the Russian/British invasion of China starting in round 1.
It’s sleazy because it was likely not anticipated by the rule makers :-)
Can opening obviously was
starting a game with wittman - he wants to place a unit in kenya. i said there had to be a unit present to place another unit. perhaps that’s only true of fleet. i know people take inf in DNG so please refresh my memory?
Thanks
Is only true of fleet.
We used to have the rule that you had to have a unit there on land too, but that has been changed
A rules loophole has been discovered in the MagicQ-JDOW Playoff1 Championship game
The 2nd edition rulebook prohibits ships from moving away from a seazone with only submarines/transports (a non-hostile seazone) during the combat movement phase if those ships will not be participating in combat elsewhere.
Per Krieghund, this was not intended. He said you should be able to move ships away from a zone with only submarines/transports during the combat movement phase, in order to avoid the combat with the submarines/transports, even if those ships are not participating in combat elsewhere.
By default, all league games follow the 2nd edition rulebook, FAQ, and errata as written, not as intended. However, I point this out to league players so that you may agree before starting a game that you are closing this loophole. Without mutual agreement of both players, the rules as written in the rulebook, FAQ, and errata stand as written and will be enforced.
can’t you just decide not to attack the sub/transport and then proceed to move (or not) in the ncm?
Yes, you can
So the rule loophole doesn’t matter at all?
No, it matters
It’s sleazy because it was likely not anticipated by the rule makers :-)
Can opening obviously was
I suppose the fix would be that UK would not be at war if Anzac declares war until either attacked or its becomes UK’s turn.
Actually pretty easy.
This one probably doesn’t come up too often, but I just found a bug in triplea.
Japan shouldn’t get their peace bonus if they attack FIC, even if they don’t take it. In a game where UK/Aussies DOW’d me and I hit FIC with 1 inf + air to kill a Brit fighter that had just sunk some of my ships. I didn’t take it and triplea still gave me the bonus.
