While Xenophobia is in effect can the Russian sub fight together with the UK/US fleet. Xenophobia seems to only work one way – STAY OUT OF RUSSIA…
Russia can attack into Persia and India alongside US/UK troops and DAS out there as well – correct?
Our rule lawyers are at it again.
Russian and western ally units cannot fight together, but if the Soviet sub is in a sea zone with UK/ USA naval, then it defends like anything else…but not attack.
Xenophobia:
Once Russia has “Liberated” an ally country (e.g., Persia & India) and now controls them can US/UK forces re-enter into those zones?
The argument was made that Xenophobia is only exerted against all the original Russian territories (e.g., Rust Red countries) and not against new acquisitions.
All Soviet “liberations” preclude the allies from entering these for any reason (consider them now soviet territories) unless the axis retake it and drive out all Soviet units, THEN the allies can come back in and take it.
O.k. I know I’m mix’ing and matching rules - but after 14 hours of playing over the weekend, we’ve integrated stuff from AARHE Lite.
So, here’s the next question on Tech Dice.
Do Germany & US have to announce up front what they are rolling for, or can they roll one die and then choose the next roll based off the results of the first.
Rule states: “Assign free and purchased dice [ on page 6 ] to technologies before rolling.”
Rule lawyers argued they were assigning them before they rolled, just one at a time vs. the opponents who said you have to announce all dice up front independent of the outcome of each other.
Ok good point. You assign all the dice first: You have a total of say 6 dice (including ones you bought) then you allocate them to different techs, then you roll. Regardless of what you roll, you do not midstream re-allocate the dice to different techs….thats cheating.
Air attack limitations of 2 out and 2 back really hampers Germany ability to fight in Africa. You used to be able to attack Anglo-Egypt and land in Lybia. Removing that option changes the dynamics of that whole theater of war.
Was this done intentionally?
Any insights appreciated.
You have to allocate dedicated air units for the African campaign… they cannot fly from mid Russia, attack Egypt, then fly and defend french coastline all in the same turn. The game promotes independent air forces for each front, just like in the real war and the way we chose to do this was by that rule. One of the things that bugs us is how you have that bomber sitting in libya which can reach nearly every European territory Germany controls…Instead of that you buy some 8 ipc fighter bombers and stick them in africa to support your efforts.
Technology Transfer:
US develops Hv. Bombers & UK finishes ASW on the same turn.
According to the rules, they can each transfer a tech to each other. Seems a bit much. I wanted to limit it to one tech transfer each turn.
“One progress box of minor technology (3 or less progress boxes) may be selected for transfer between US/UK and Germany/Italy/Japan per direction per turn”.
Is this just to try and shut the game quicker as it progresses?
Any thoughts?
Transfer takes place on the turn following acquisition at the rate of one level, one tech per nation…So if USA and UK combined for 4 advances in different techs, the other only benefits by one level each turn so taking 4 turns to “learn” the tech. Also, Soviets don’t share and vice versa. So that is saying ONE TECH TRANSFER BOX PER TURN…when we say “One progress box of minor technology”
AND REMEMBER ITS MINOR.
Can Japan bridge troops over during the reinforcement phase of the non-combat move?
e.g., transport moves from sz60 -> sz61 and loads up a tank and troop and drops them into Manchuria during the reinforcement phase?
Seems to be within the scope of a piece only moving to an adjacent zone during this phase.
Yes as long as they have a unloaded tranny in between Japan and Manchuria, they can allocate ONE SR transfer across the sea zone.
