Questions

Well, frederick319, thanks to your response further up the thread, I settled on getting the 335 piece printed version instead of the rarer 330 piece printed one. I found one on ebay and to my surprise, not only did it have the red Chinese pieces (which were pretty clear in the pictures), it also had all 8 of the Wildcat/Hellcat pieces as well as the miscounted US infantry pieces with 12-olive infantry and 25-green Marines! So a double bonus since olive infantry are easy to come by!

Production values seemed pretty close to my original Pacific set (345 piece printing with the red Japanese pieces).

Geoff

Ah, thanks. Didn’t know that FAQ existed.

@yucatan:

What happens in this case:

Attacker has 2sub, 2ftr, 1ac vs 2sub, 1dst

No dst for attacker so defender’s sub are invisible to 2ftrs.
No surprise attack because the defender has 1dst.

Attacker rolls 2hits: 1 from sub and 1 from ftr.
Now the defender has to choice the casualties. Could he choice the dst as casualty from the sub and no more else because the subs cannot be hitten by ftrs?

No.  All the hits must be assigned if possible, so the fighter hit must be assigned to the destroyer.

@yucatan:

Other thing:
The attacker starts the turn with an enemy sub within his navy. Let’s assume 1sub, 1trn vs 1sub.
The attacker decide to stay and combat, but, after the 1st round of combat (trn lost) he decides to retire. Where?
The rules say “in a sea zone from where at least one combat unit comes”. What happens in this case? They were already there…

In order to allow for the possibility of retreating, they must first move out of the original sea zone and then back into it during Combat Movement.  The sea zone moved through must of course be free of enemy units, otherwise they couldn’t leave it again once they entered.  If this isn’t possible, then neither is retreating.  Of course, the attacking sub may submerge in any case.

Thnx for the extra confirmation Frimmel…. So, the game continues…

I’ve just read through the rulebook again in more detail. Here’re my own interpretation to the questions you’ve raised, Inxduk. (Of course, everyone can has his/her own interpretation :D )

First, let’s talk about the term “adjacent”. On page 12 of the rulebook, in the section of Air Bases, it says “Aircraft … do not have to use up one movement to go between the territory and the sea zone in which the base is situated, or is adjacent to.” The meaning of “adjacent” here is obviously geographical. Then, if we assume that the terms through out the manual is coherent. It is reasonable to believe that the “adjacent” on page 24 has the same meaning.

Next, let’s discuss the matter of Naval Bases. In fact, I think that the rule listed in page 24 of the rulebook is very simple and clear. Notice the term used in the rulebook: “naval units”. It hasn’t said anything about a specific kind of naval unit. It says nothing about transport. In my point of view, the only restrictions on the use of the naval bases are: 1) Non-combat movement. 2) Starting and destination naval bases have to be friendly before the movement is made. 3) not more than 3 spaces. Once they are all fulfilled, you can do whatever you like. Therefore, I can’t see any point in prohibiting transports from doing such kind of action.

Just my 2 cents… :oops:

Yes you’re right and that I guess is my problem. When you get right down to it the japanese were simply out of their minds . nevertheless the VP system is silly there has to be a better way to mimic historical goals. Japan did know it had to project enough power to make the U.S. (in their ninds) come to terms. The fact that we never would have done that is irrelevent though for Japan in history as in the game has a hard time doing much of anything but hang on in the face of U.S. industrial power.However the concept that china is worthless to the Japanese seems untrue to me . again I will close with a thought that through our new computer age you could easily create a scenario where all had the same map but had to discover for themselves where the enemy is making alliances all the more important etc. It better mirrors reality. What if we did not know what the other nation was producing necessarily or when and where? We all learned the rules before puberty when we played war in the woods, the key was not the most guys but the best, build good defenses and sneak up on the other guy find out what he’s doing and ambush him. Simple as this if you can’t ambush the outcome is solely tied to the card game war not real war strategy. Oh god I just ruined this damn game for myself AAAAGGGHHHHHH!!!

basically, if an American fighter is on a British Air craft Carrier, it can defend if attacked, but its just dead weight if the Air craft carrier goes on the offensive.

At the end of each turn, you add up the IPC value of territories controlled by the side you are playing and you receive that many IPCs.  For the UK, in addition to the value of the territories, you get up to 12 IPCs for UK convoys that you can distribute between Australia and India at the end of your turn.  The US also has convoys which can add a further 15 IPCs to the US total if they control those.

In AA Pacific, in obtain IPCs for a particular territory, the country must control both the terrritory and any associated convoy route.  For examply if Japan holds Philippines, it must also control sz38 in order to get the 3 IPCs for Philippines.  If Japan controls Philippines but the US controls sz 38, neither side gets the IPCs for that turn.

I hope this helps.

SS