Build/Placement question…

@oysteilo:

@Young:

@oysteilo:

What do you guys think? I am starting to think it is okey. � In most cases the Scotland fighter lives and the gib fighter can defend as well. This means if London buys 6 inf and 1plane you have like 11 inf/mech and 3 planes (2).if everything goes poorly buy 9 inf. Why not?

What about the UK keeping all their income turn 1?

If there’s no Sealion threat… buy all the fighters you like turn 3, but if there’s a Sealion threat… than buy all the infantry you like turn 2.

I think the problem with that is, if Germany does go for sea lion you are only allowed to place 10 units in London, You need more than that

True

Welcome to the forum Jman.

Welcome, General A-Ron!

Wheatbeer is correct.  Since Kamikaze strikes occur at the beginning of the Conduct Combat phase, any attacking air units are already in the air.

On the subject of convoy disruption, here’s a quote from the 2nd edition Rulebook:

There are three conditions that must exist for this kind of attack to occur:
1. The sea zone must have a “Convoy” image,
2. The sea zone must be adjacent to one or more of your controlled territories, and
3. At least 1 warship belonging to a power with which you are at war must be in the sea zone. (Any ships in the sea zone that belong to you or a friendly power will have no effect on convoy disruption.)

Convoy attacks on “Convoy” sea zones are conducted in the following manner.

Each enemy warship (except for aircraft carriers) and carrier-based air unit in the sea zone might cause the loss of 1 or more IPCs from your income for the turn. The owners of enemy battleships, cruisers, and/or destroyers rolls one die for each such unit, and the owners of enemy submarines and/or air units roll two dice for each such unit. Any rolls of “4” or higher are ignored. The results of these rolls that are “3” or less are totaled, and the resulting number is the total convoy damage suffered in the disruption. However, this number might be limited. Each disrupted convoy can’t lose more IPCs than the total IPC value of your controlled territories adjacent to the sea zone. Also, no single territory can lose more IPCs than its own IPC value from multiple disrupted adjacent convoys (for example, Japan cannot lose more than 8 IPCs from disrupted convoys in sea zones 6 and 19). After these limits are applied, the final total is subtracted from your income for the turn.

@knp7765:

So you are suggesting that the British player loses his capital so that he can sink the German navy? Seems kind of far fetched to me. Yeah, I guess if the German navy were taken out, it would help the US Navy later on and they could liberate London possibly. In the mean time, Germany got to plunder the British treasury and run hog wild on Russia while Italy gets strong in the Med and Africa since the UK can no longer replace their losses there. I suppose India could send stuff over to face Italy, but what if they are being pressured by Japan?

Yes, but Germany spent 2 rounds of income on a fleet so they essentially lose their ground units, probably some air units, the French treasury and whatever ground they have left would be sitting on London, assuming this worked/works.

So what’s holding back the Russians at that point?  They can DOW the round London falls.  (great, now I have that Fergie song in my head!  Bastages!!!)

3 spaces left to land, it’s only 1 when you’re defending.

Ah, I recognize that philosophy:  “There are few submarine problems that can’t be resolved with a suitable application of depth charges”.

@aethervox:

Does Sea Zone 110 include the English Channel? I assume it does. However, it appears the English Channel could be considered sparate from Zone 110 - it certainly would give consideration to the Strait of Dover as a dividing line between the North Sea (zones 110,11 & 112) and the English Channel.

Yes.  SZ110 connects SZ104, 105 & 109 to 111 & 112.  There is no seperate English Channel Seazone.  The only Seazone that is currently unmarked (and should be numbered) is the Caspian Sea.

on G1, However no one starts with NO income