Rule Clarification (Sub vs. BB)

Yeah that India paper needs an edit.  It’s like 5 years old no?

I don’t consider India the optimal Allied strategy, but I’ve been beaten by it enough times to realize it is a workable strategy.

I think what I was trying to do was browse too it, but then again, it was so long ago (Switch and I were on the same side, politically, at the time.)

I use hotmail, probably always will since the entire world knows my hotmail address.

@Ranor:

LHTR 2.0 says to this:

“If the attacker has not withdrawn all units, defending submarines may submerge.”

This implies defending subs submerge after the attacker has chosen to either retreat (or submerge) or not.

(page 16 - Condition B) Defender withdraws subs by submerging)

Page 14 is more to the point.

It categorically states that the Attacker choses to press the attack or retreat BEFORE defending submarines chose to submerge or remain surfaced.

thanx guys you’ve all been a great help :-)

It’s kind of hard to search for an  obscure rule clarification…

And the threads could still contain multiple people’s opinions, with a consensus emerging as the discussion evolves.

True, the presence of a DST in a SZ that a SUB is passing through leads to “detection” of the SUB by the DST and combat results in the SZ.

Thus in NCM movement, a DST BLOCKS movement by a SUB through that SZ, since the SUB cannot NCM through it.

Regardless, please move further discussion of destruction of AA guns (other than being destroyed by being sunk on a TRN) to the House Rules area.

Yep… I had that argument with Tri in one of our earlier games…  I was using the box rules which implied somethign else, he was using LHTR, which are explicit.