Opening w/japan…

very true my friend, but you cannot let japan cross the suez canal.

At this link you may download the set Up Charts in excel format, ready to be printed and used:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/10093.

Look in the “File” section at the bottom of the page.

Yea, I’ve used an Egyptian one the same way once.  Though, what really kept me from an invasion wasn’t the IC or your silly Submarines, which did nothing but die.  It was lack of strength to follow up the invasion.

Your just not good enough to take America from me Doug…  I keep luring you in and step on your greedy hand…

Actually, this was teh thread that started teh whole thing that led to LHTR 1.3.  It was about using friendly ships that were already in an enemy occupied sea zone as fodder for your attack on those enemy ships.

Under the new LHTR that came out of this, the Allies can NOT use those US ships that are already in SZ59 as fodder for a UK attack on the Japan ships in SZ59.

This became the “Multinational Forces on Attack” thread.

if you are playing with optionional rules it might work out( cos briton is probably going to put his free IC on INDIA and Amer get’s one infantry for free every turn in sinkiang or china), but if you are playing without them it would be unfair (cos U.K. and U.S. will lose their teritories and won’t be able to get them back. Trust me. I prefer playing with optional rules(all of them) because lots of things gests balanced

Variant 3 will make subs more or less useless against a Japanese fleet with at least one BB. So I think it is better to not mess up too much with the rules and vote for variant 2 or 1. In plain english, it is not worth fixing a rule that is supposed to fix another one. Things can get too complicated if one does! :wink: