Posts made by Miket2424

Hi, here is the scenario i am confused about. I had an argument over it with my allied opponent:  player 1 sends 2 subs to attack a carrier in a sea zone, say north of Norway. Norway is attacked by player 1 also.  The sea battle is conducted first and the carrier is destroyed by the subs. The fighters on the carrier can’t hit the sub and must land.

Question: Can the fighters land on Norway and help defend against the attack?  Where in the rulebook is this clarified, I can’t find it.

Question 2: Is sea zone 3 considered adjacent to the UK Isle land territory. i.e. can ships be constructed there with just a complex on UK?

Thanks!  :-)

Hi all, just a question about the 42 map. Does sea zone 64 border W U.S.? This would make it a buildable sea zone off the bat. My opponent thinks he should be able to build there.  Thanks

Thanks for posting those maps for us. The AA42 map is inadaquite  and I want to print out a larger one. I guess I will print on paper and stick to poster board, uless I find a better material for it.

Bad luck in war is entirely realistic. Look at Midway. Japanese rolled badly historically, losing 4 carriers and all fighters and failing to capture the island while US just lost a carrier and some fighters.

So if you convert to IPCs it would be 4 carriers = 56 and 8 fighter = 80  vs.

1 carrier and 2 fighter = 34

Japan lost 136 IPCs compared to 34 for the US.

:-o

But WHY are the axis at a disadvantage? Has this been proven, or is it just how people “feel”?

Just wondering why so many players think Axis need help with extra money in Revised. I seems pretty balanced to me. And it was playtested by some good gamers wasn’t it?

I luv the game, but the one thing that irks me is that transports can inflict heavy damage on airfleets and warships with a little luck. I was playing a game today, and my opponent attacks a jap trans with 2 US fighters. I lucked out and rolled a 1 and he missed with both fighters, then the battle went a few more rounds and he won, but I was close to winning with a bit of luck.

Then I attacked 3 transports in SZ7 with a bomber and fighter. He rolled 1 twice, winning with 1 transport left.

On a third occasion, he attcked my destroyer and trans with a sub, and I missed with the destroyer and hit with the transport. AN ESCORT CAN NOT ALLOW HIS PROTECTED SHIP TO DESTROY A SUB.

All of this defies all logic of military thinking. I used to consider the transport an abstract representation of an escorted convoy, but now that we can buy destroyers, that is no longer a realistic assumption.

I hate the low luck rules and we love throwing dice, so is there any good house rule to make transports a less dangerous but balanced part of the game? :?