Two Rules Questions

:-D
In the movie; Battle of the Bulge, there is a scene where the german generals are discussing this story about the chocolate cake, still very fresh, ( I think they may have actually eaten it) and saying if the Americans have ample resources to spend on shipping cake to their soldiers then we are lost. Something to that effect anyway.
Another story, off topic, sorta, is that some bomber crews were talking about all the different kinds of ordanance that we were dropping on germany, and one crewman said, “We’ve dropped everything but the kitchen sink!” So on the next mission, you guessed it, they brought along a kitchen sink and threw it out one of the side gun windows during Bombs Away! :roll:

@Amon:

i know its odd

but

is it allowed to remove( some )of your units from the board

i mean to simply destroy them

or is it against the rules

thanks :lol:

i know its odd

but

is it allowed to just put (some) of your units from the board

i mean to simply create them

or is it against the rules

thanks :lol:

–

Generally, if it ain’t in the rules, you can’t do it.  You could HOUSERULE it, but that would be a houserule.

I still like my cat bioweapon weapons development research houserule.

wrong section to post these . put them in house rules. This forum is only for the OOB game.

Actually Cragi, he stated that they flew over Western to attack, and back over Western to retreat.  For that to be the case (in the #1 example at the start of the thread) the FIGs would HAVE to be attacking, not defending.

And under LHTR, Attacking aircraft retreat as I specified.

Bid still needed.

Average is $7 to $9

I’ve used them a few times to bomb Germany into the stone age.  Especially on a KJF strategy.

England pumping out 1 or 2 bombers a round up to 3, America keeping 2 or 3 bombers in England and then blowing the heck outta both Germany facilities will severely limit his production.  Heck, 6 bombers vs Germany herself is still 20 damage, that’s 6.66 infantry they are not buying to prosecute the war.  And remember, those rounds you don’t loose a bomber, you don’t build one, you build fighters or transports or land units instead.

Meanwhile, America is more then capable of taking out Japan.  If Japan switches to building navy they do not have the man power to make significant gains against Russia/America/British stonewalling and thus America can easily out produce them, especially when America starts grabbing islands.

@ShadowHAwk:

Eh but 2 does not state it has to be a combat move. And since submarines threat hostile seazones as friendly the zone is effectively not a hostile zone and number 3 allows the movement. I would say Yes to question 3 based on this. Moving through a friendly seazone is not considered a combat move and the SZ not containing destroyers is effectively a friendly seazone for a sub.

Well, I’d be willing to advocate both views. As I quoted submarines treat hostile sea zones as friendly, but that statement is under “combat movement phase”. Looking under “ncm phase” this is not repeated, in fact, it states that NO sea units may move through hostile sea zones EXCEPT in the case of enemy submerged submarines.

Might be worth looking more into, but I assume mostly for theoretical interest.

@The:

The Japanese capitol ships are irreplaceable…That is Japans weak link…Wipe their navy out,however you can and Japan falls like a ripe apple.They wont be able to build an army large enough,nor have enough time to fight Russia

I agree, however its not that easy to catch the Japan navy if they play smart. I f the US navy at Pearl Harbour is destroyed at J1 it will take several turn before US can destroy the Japan navy if it stays together. And if US want to land in France it will even harder for the US navy get the upper hand on Japan. But it is possible, ive seen it happen.