The rules say that I can play a single player up to 3 times, for a best 2 out of 3 match. If I get 2 wins, does that count as 1 game or 2 games?
It’s not up to 3 times that you can play, it’s best of 3.
So you can only play a 3rd game that counts, if you each won a game first and are split 1-1.
If you go 2-0 or 0-2, you are done.
Until you both get to 10 games played, when it is expanded to best of 5 (first to 3 wins)
I have heard about people rolling dice in the forum. Can someone kindly explain to me how this is achieved? Thank you.
;aaa 2@1 2@2 1@3 1@4;
Where semi-colons are colons instead
This would be a roll for 3 infantry, 1 artillery, a tank and a bomber
You can also roll any number of 6 sided dice with ;dice X; where X is the number of dice you want to roll, but be cautioned that it will always automatically sort the results in numerical order, not in throw order
You can roll non-six sided dice with ;dice Xd20; where X is the number of dice you want to roll and the 20 can be whatever number. In this example, that’s a 20 sided die
Thanks gamerman! Enjoy your weekend!
rules question:
japan has a ss in 19 and US is bringing in a dd + tps to do an amphib on several coastal territories. the dd is brought in just to escort the tps past the ss, but is deciding not to attack the ss. if japan sinks the dd with a kami, will that block the amphib from proceeding?
Yes, because the kamikaze forces combat in the zone, which means the sub cannot be ignored if the Japanese player uses at least 1 kamikaze
Krieghund said that kamikaze’s do not trigger a sea battle in this thread, and that ignoring the sub occurs during combat movement phase while kamikazes happen during the combat phase:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35967.0
I have a follow up question. What if the empty Philippines is guarded by a single sub, and the Allies send a transport guarded by a destroyer, intending to ignore the submarine to conduct an amphibious assault? I would assume Japan can use its kamikazes because of the amphibious assault, but would the destruction of the destroyer prevent the landing (as lone transports can’t amphibious assault against subs), or would the landing go through since the destroyer already ignored the sub?
@wittmann:
Morning Colonel Carter.
The Japanese player can use a Kamikaze and if the DD is eliminated by the Kamikaze, the Sub will prevent the landing.
Sorry, wittmann, but that’s incorrect. Kamikaze strikes, while they do prevent offshore bombardment, do not provoke a sea battle by themselves. As the destroyer was present in the sea zone at the end of combat movement (kamikaze strikes occur in the combat phase), the sub could be ignored, and as there is no sea battle for the sub to be drawn into, it will not prevent the amphibious assault.
ohh, this is interesting…could gamer be wrong for once?!
Eh - should have qualified my answer - I wasn’t 100% sure I was remembering right
Eh - should have qualified my answer - I wasn’t 100% sure I was remembering right
ok, so it does not block amphibious then, right?
Kamikaze strikes don’t bring ignored subs into the battle
This is one of those rules I only remember because I was so dang surprised when I first came across it.
Reason is, as Krieghund and Wheatbeer explained:
You ignore the sub in the combat movement phase, so it is then out of the picture. Kamikaze attack happens in the conduct combat phase. It doesn’t bring the ignored sub back into combat
ok thank you guys for the clarification on this rule. it makes sense.
Can empty transports that participated in combat load in the non-combat phase?
Actually the situation is more complex than that. I can’t type much right now but as soon as I get the chance I’ll describe unless Adam can do
i might be missing something but I think the simple answer is “no”.
I can answer the question after dominion gives us his perspective
Germany has tps in 110 & 112, U.S. drops dd in both zones (from Norway fac) to prevent them from loading for combat. Ok I get that rule. So to prevent this from happening yet again, and to keep them safe with my navy, I (Germany) moved them into 112 during cm along with my warships, killed the dd, and then during ncm, I loaded up the tps.
I don’t see how this is an issue, since it’s the land units that are moving during their ncm. I get that the tps can’t move, but it shouldn’t prevent the land units from moving (in this case onto the tps).
If I’m wrong on this, then I have to say my tps investment was totally worthless. It’d be an endless loop of US dropping a dd to thwart amphibs, unless I moved navy deeper inside Baltic Sea, which would put it at a seriously inferior position (and easily locked in).
