Why is the Caspian Sea not labelled?

@shadowhawk

Agreed.

I tried out Sea Lion in a game, again, with a few changes.  I did do a J1 because its just sooo good for Japan.

*before Sea Lion invasion, the U.S. positioned itself for Gibraltor route, rather than Canada.  So Germany used its cruiser in SZ104 and bombed Gibraltor’s naval base I2 so the U.S. could not counter attack.  Alternatively, if the U.K. hadn’t had planes in place to reinforce, I might’ve let U.S. retake London, so UK could collect on UK3, and Germany could just take London again on G4 and pocket 30ipc instead of 8.
*on G3, Germany bought a carrier for SZ110 so transports wouldn’t be sunk.  Bombers couldn’t hit because I’d taken Scotland on G2
*on G3 I bought 3 inf for Normandy so that they could end up in London on G4 with the 3 inf I could buy and prevent the U.S. from taking it.
*used all the inf from Norway/Finland for Sea Lion, except one as a blocker in Finland.  This left quite a lot of German troops in the way on mainland Europe, 25+.  I parked them in Romania along with Italy’s 2inf, 2arton G3 once Russia committed its stack to the southern route.  He never did attack there.

*also on G3/G4, I bought slow movers.  I had 10 transports available to take back Norway, Finland, and also hit Baltic States and Novgorod all at once.  This was a serious hit to Russia who lost 10ish inf/art spread out over these areas.

With Japan whooping in the Pacific, the U.S. had an impossible choice and made the mistake of splitting his focus.  He never did liberate London.

Italy committed its land forces to Eastern Europe.  I used its planes to hit anything I could of the UK’s in the Med or Egypt.  By the end of turn 5, UK had 2 inf and an anti air gun, 2 transports left, total.

Russia was a PIA for quite a while, but by round 6 the front line was finally at Ukraine in the south and Germany solidly had Leningrad, and could start bombing Moscow and buying nothing but fast movers.

IPC’s were nice.  After G4, Germany was making 52 ipc base plus 15 ipc NO bonuses (London, Scandinavia, and Novgorod).  This plus the 30 ipcs from sacking London easily paid for the units to take and keep London.

Must you send a lone sub against a huge fleet that is blocking the way that is preventing you from bringing a carrier into position (say during NCM) to pick up planes that could potentially survive and need a landing space from some other battle, even though you “know” that you cannot win this battle in any event and that the planes will end up ditching?

Yes in low luck, and yes without.  The only hitch here is that you MUST send the sub to make this attack.  You cannot win a battle you do not attempt to fight.

I do see what you are saying, that in low luck, there are no “hits and misses” and therefore, since the attack could never be won without immense luck, that it doesn’t meet the summary judgment rule (all attacker hits and all defender misses).  But as you also mention, low luck is a tacked-on rule, so we just go back to what it says in the main rulebook;  if there is any chance no matter how slight of you winning, you can bring the fighters as long as you make some attempt with at least 1 unit to clear the crucial zone.  The sub still meets the test of the rule even though low luck makes its odds go from 1% to 0%.

What if we attack the blocking fleet with a (damaged?) aircraft carrier, alone, which has no combat rating and therefore, can never “inevitably” hit?  Maybe this is an even gameyer test of this rule (though we may find some other rule that states that you have to bring at least 1 attacker with attack value into a combat…)

One thing the Germans can do is hit the UK Cruiser in SZ91 which I used to do but stopped because those two subs are better used hitting SZ110 and therefore preserving more of the Luftwaffe.

Taranto is a pretty much all or nothing option for the UK but assuming it happens and succeeds the UK fleet is generally toast anyway. Is it really worth going to much length to stop?

@WILD:

@knp7765:

This is why we modified the Russian NO with our own house rule……

I know this is out of place, but the Russian NO is very much part of an over all Med strat….(one that shouldn’t exist IMO).

Yea, the 3 IPC bonus the Russians get for Italian African territories, and Med islands is ridiculous (it has been a major gripe sense it was introduced). This theater was never a realistic or historic goal for the Russians, and it is exploited way to much as ppl get more familiar with it. This NO was changed partially to boost the Russians if there is a Sea Lion (kinda like a penalty), but now it is being manipulated even w/o Sea Lion.

IMO Finland, The Balkans, The Mid East, and Eastern Europe (Orig German territories) are a realistic goal. I’l even buy Original Italian possession in Europe like Albania, parts of N Italy and maybe even Rome could also be added to the list (but the Americans beat them to it for the most part).

What we are experimenting with (not an original house rule by any means) is that Russia gets a bonus for any Orig German, Orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral , and Pro Allied Neutral territory that Russia is in control of equal to that territories IPC value (could also include True Neutrals activated by the Axis, or liberated by Russia from the Axis). This makes the Italian Med islands worthless, and Libya/Ethiopia hardly worth going after. It will tone down some territory bonuses for the Russians (like Bulgaria), but allows them some new territories to target as well that were more in tune with their goals IMO.

Obviously Finland was a major goal, but so was the Balkans (Bulgaria, Yugo, Romania, maybe Albania, and Greece) especially once they beat back the Germans (like in a Sea Lion attempt, or a failed assault on Moscow). In The Mid East it still allows the Russians to gain NO bonus for control of Iraq (reduced), and now Persia for added income once at war (could be as late as R4 before they could be in either because they have to pause in NW Persia). The NO bonus for Iraq, and Persia could also simulate the lend lease coming up through the Persian Gulf. I know that Persia being Russian isn’t very historical as it was British controlled (Russia did invade what is NW Persia though). My thinking here is that if the UK doesn’t take Persia early (leaving it for Russia), then the Allies are out some English Pounds and a couple of inf needed early on. If Germany does a G3 Barbarossa, then by time Russia gets to Persia it would be Rus4 (6 or more IPCs lost to England if they activated it UK1). It would be a viable target however for the Russians to Liberate Persia from the Axis after going for the Oil Bonus, to get a bonus of their own).

In the event of a Sea Lion (or failed assault on Moscow), the Russians would still get good bonuses for the orig German, orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral, and now some Pro allied Neutral territories in the Balkans & Mid East (average of 2-3 IPCs each). If they crack into Northern Italy, or Greater German territories then their NO bonuses rise even more.

The med island thing is no big deal, since 1 axis plane in SITA stops any russian landing.  But, I do like the NO changes you proposed.  It should only affect Original axis in Europe, and all neutrals in Europe/Middle-East. (No islands).

@bracconebaldo:

In the case i mobilize new naval units in an occupied SZ…the opponent can always move his naval units from that SZ?

Yes, he is not forced to fight your new reinforcements. He can opt but doesn’t have to. I think this is the only situation where units can (must) move during the CM without triggering a combat.

Ofc, those units cannot move again during the NCM…

Still taking india round 3 must be rough. defense 2 aa guns roughly 15+ guys. offense 21 air with 6 man drop. If he loses india he should get decent TUV kill and china should still be around for a little bit longer.

Plus it is a dead giveaway if all your warships are figs get put down there, which is why ya need your destroyer for a bit. Depending on how you position before you take the islands for your NO.

Jenn, don’t talk to me, you obviously didn’t read the last part of what I said.

@suprise:

Page 18 of the Euro rule book and page 16 of the Pacific rule book
  My interp. of this is 1 sub, 1 carr with 2 planes. the sub gets a hit what happens …… the carr is tipped and the planes are in the air  if the sub does not fire a second shot then the planes need to land within their movement allowance. If you had 2 subs and they both hit then the carr would go down  I would say the planes would get away because subs cant hit air units
  Those two pages answer the Q’s for me

The movement allowance is only one when defending. The planes would need to land on an adjacent island, coastal tt, or friendly carrier w/room on board.