Posts made by TimTheEnchanter

@ncscswitch:

For the same reason that you cannot “defender retreat” is the reason that you cannot re-arrange your FIGs.

That is the ATTACKER’s move, not the defender’s.  So the defender units can DEFEND, but they cannot MOVE, and that would include moving from 1 AC to another.

I can understand that sentiment, but nothing in the rules seems to state this definitively.  In fact, all the discussion of Combat Moves and Non-Combat Moves has to do with traveling from one territory or zone to another. (For example, when discussing ships that start in a hostile territory the rules use the phrase “Once these sea units have moved and/or participated in combat…” [emphasis added] which implies that the units staying in the sea zone did not move per se, or the “OR” would not be necessary).  However, the rules do clearly state that the planes can go in the air when it is not their turn.  And last time I checked, WW2 figs could not hover, so I think by rule they must be “moving”, albeit within the sea zone so it shouldn’t be considered a “Move” in game terminology.

Can anyone find actual statements in the rules document to support the intuitive sentiment switch is purporting?

But according to the rules, if attacked those figs are already in the air within that sea zone.  if the cv is sunk they could even fly to an adjacent territory (Oh look! Units moving when it’s not their turn!  Things that make you go “Hmmm…”  :|)

The rules state they’re already flying while the opponent takes they’re turn.  Why couldn’t they fly around their sea zone to the accompanying carrier during this intervening turn by the enemy?

Quick rules question that I can’t find an answer to  (LHTR 2.0 if it matters)

If Nation A’s figs are on a friendly nation B’s CV, and that nations figs are on nation A’s CV in the same Sz, can they shuffle to the other carrier, or does one CV have to be cleared out first, then the planes move to it, then the second carrier can be filled the next turn?

I would think they could shuffle, especially if there was an intervening turn by the opponent, because planes are assumed to be up in the air to defend each turn so they could easily land on another CV in the same Sz without waiting for a full “movement” on their turn,  but I could be wrong.

For example: 2 Japan figs land on an German carrier.  Then on Germany’s turn it moves the carrier (with J figs as cargo) to a Sz with a Japanese CV and also sends 2 German figs to the same zone.  When Japan moves next, must the German planes reside on the Japanese CV since it was the only one open when they landed?  Or could they have  “shuffled” back to their own CV, say, during Britain’s turn.

To get 10 units per turn you’re building 8 units in japan plus diverting units from FIC?  If you send 5inf/5arm to n.america you’ve only got 4 more units being produced (1 in FIC, 3 in india).  If your income is at 52, you’ve only got enough to buy 4 inf.  You’ll be hard-pressed to keep your income at 52 putting only 4 men into asia each turn.

Furthermore, the US will have the ability to ‘economize’ buying more infantry with their superior defensive power, and still throw in a tank or two each turn, so even though you are sending more ipcs, they’re able to outproduce you on hit points. With their 35 ipcs, they can easily build 23 defensive hit points and 11 units (10 inf in wus and an arm in eus), while you spend 40ipcs, but only bring 10 units and 20 hit points.  Unless you really catch them off-guard (and more than 4 trns in sz60 should be a huge red flag) it’s hard to get ahead on the economic exchange.  You can spend more, but it’s hard to bring more to the fight.

@Gamer:

@Krieghund:

@Gamer:

AA gun shots are directed fire (i.e., shoots at EACH air unit).  Therefore, you roll a specific die for each plane.

Not exactly.  According to the FAQ, you don’t literally roll a specific die for each plane, you just roll for the bombers and the fighters separately.  It’s still up to the air units’ owning player which individual units are hit within that type.  This makes a difference only insofar as choosing to lose a plane that has travelled further to the combat in order to allow more flexibility in where to move surviving planes after combat.

The purpose of this rule is simply to keep the owning player from assigning all AA hits to fighters rather than bombers.

Krieg, thanks for the clarification.  You are correct.  I think Triple A automatically assigns the hit to the plane traveling farthest, which is virtually always what you would prefer.

I thought Triplea picked the individual planes by random.  I’m pretty sure I’ve had battles where I was left with fewer movement points than I expected.

Caspian Sub had a mention of this (their comment was specifically in regards to AA guns which, unlike other units, aren’t even destroyed if you lose the battle)  Their solution was that you couldn’t destroy them, but that (for an 8 ipc price) you could “hide” one at the bottom of the ocean by putting it onto a transport that was likely to be sunk.

Now if you could only destroy factories… ;)

This can also be useful if you use a light force to clear a territory, then you can send tanks through to a friendly territory on the other side.

For example, say japan has a big stack of armor and a couple infs in india and a lot of infs in sinkiang.  Let’s also assume the allies have picket defense in kaz and persia.  Either stack would get smacked on it’s own, but together they should hold a territory.  Use a few infs from sinkiang to capture Kaz, and a light force to take persia, then, once you know both battles were victorious, you can shoot the armor stack from india up to Kaz with the inf stack from sinkiang for a formidable hold on the territory.  (I’ve used this to swing US tanks from TRJ through Persia to Caucasus, or to get UK armor from Norway through Karelia to Arc or WRu to help defend russia as well)

@cyan:

@Amon:

@kfgolfer:

I might be missing the boat here, but I don’t see the importance of Australia?

The greatest significance from capturing Australia & New Zealand when playing the Axis is in reducing UK economic capabilities.

but is it worth the cost to to kill all those inf that will not be able to harm anything if let be?

The three ipc’s means one less inf for the axis AND one more for the allies.  It’s a net 6 ipc’s every turn.  You don’t think 2 inf per turn can make a significant difference?  The point is not to kill the infs, it’s to keep their buddies from showing up in Europe where they can do real damage.

@Complex:

I have another question concerning valid landing spaces for fighters on CVs.

Assume that there is a fully loaded CV in a SZ. In the adjacent zone, there is an enemy SS. The SZ two spaces away is empty, three spaces away, there is an enemy Transport.

Is it possible to attack the Transport with the fighters, declaring that the CV will move two spaces into the empty zone in non-combat even though there is a SS blocking it? I would say no, as is it not legally possible to get the CV there in noncombat.

Is it possible to attack the Trn with one of the fighters, and the SS with the other one, declaring the SZ two spaces away as a landing zone? I would say yes, as the SS is either submerged or destroyed in combat against the fighter, so the CV can in any case move legally to the assigned landing zone in noncombat.

What if it would be any other ship blocking the move? Is it allowed to declare a fighter attack on the Trn 3 spaces away? Theoretically the fighter attack on the blocking ship could succeed, opening the way for the CV in noncombat. Of course, if the attack on the blocking ship doesn’t succeed, the other Fgt would also be lost, as there is no landing zone available (CV cannot move to pick it up). But is it even allowed to do so in the first place?

It is my understanding that claiming your landing spot is a CV to be moved in non-combat, pending clearing of the path in combat is ok.  Furthermore, I can’t find a reference to this in the LHTR, but I have seen it mentioned on these boards on more than one occasion that you can assume a “perfect” attack when declaring the move, even if it is unlikely to succeed.  The way I’ve seen it described, even if 20 battleships block the way for your CV to get to the landing zone, so long as you send one sub to contest that sea zone, you can claim your CV will sail through on non-combat to provide the landing area.  Essentially, you sacrifice an additional unit (in this case, a sub) and you get to kamikaze your planes.  Obviously if you do win the battle, you have to move your cv where you said you would.

@kfgolfer:

When you purchase say a battleship or destroyer in the beginning of your turn and when you go ahead and place them at the end, do you have to put them next to a territory where you have an IC or can you place them anywhere on the board?

The boats must be placed in a sea zone adjacent to an IC

@kfgolfer:

also, if say the UK take a transport and a tank along with a sub and attack the solomon islands where the japs have just 2 infantry there and a transport, does the sub only get one shot?  and what if the japs hang tough and kill the tank and UK is only left with a transport and sub, is the battle over at that point?

These are two separate battles.  the sea zone and the land territory are different spaces on the map, even in cases where a sea-zone completely surrounds an island.  You must win the battle in the sea zone first with your transport surviving (and your ground troops as non-participating cargo), then you must fight a second battle for the amphibious assault against the ground troops (the boats may not participate in this land battle).

Actually, one clarification to the SBRs:

on #3, I should have said “Whatever you rolled on that one die, take that many IPC’s away from that power and return them to the bank up to the IPC value of the territory”  If you SBR Caucasus and roll a 5 or 6, the enemy only loses 4 because that’s all the territory is worth.

Also, just to be clear, all my commentary assumes LHTR.

@kfgolfer:

Thank you very much for taking the time to answer my questions…

Ncscswitch… I have a couple follow-up questions.

regarding transports, can you load, move and them unload all in the same move?  combat or non-combat?  or do you have to wait to unload on your next turn? and how many moves is that?  in other words, trns can move 2 I belive, so is loading and then moving one space considered 2 moves?

Ok, I’m not switch, but I’ll try to help as well.

TRNs can definitely load, move and unload in the same turn.  Furthermore the load and unload have no impact on the trn’s movement points (other than the fact that as soon as a trn unloads it ends it’s turn even if it has move points left.

So for instance, a trn in sz10  can move load an inf from East US before moving, move 1 space to sz9 and load an armor from E.Canada, move it’s second space to sz12, and unload in algeria all during a single movement phase (either combat or non-combat depending on whether algeria is friendly)

Also note that units loading and offloading may not move before or after loading and unloading.  The units must start their turn in the territory where they get on the boat, and they must end their turn in the territory where they unload.  This even applies to 2-move units like tanks.  They can, however partake in battle (see amphibious assaults) in that territory when they land.

@kfgolfer:

and i guess the same rules apply to loading a carrier with planes?

Nope.  At the start of a turn, planes of the power/nation whose turn it is are assumed to go into the air.  The planes can use their 4 spaces during combat, non-combat or both (landing after a combat mission) but this is always measured from the place where they start their turn.  The carrier moves its 2 spaces and the figs move their 4 spaces independently.  (You can not, for example, move the carrier 2 spaces, then move the figs an additional 4 spaces)  One can move in combat and the other in non-combat if you want. But for any fig to land on the carrier it must end its turn in the same sea zone that the carrier ends its turn.  Once a fig lands on the carrier, the carrier must stop there.

So for example, a us carrier with 2 figs starts in sz10. Let’s also assume the us has another fig in caucasus  During combat, one fig flies from sz10 to algeria (3 spaces) and the other fig and carrier fight a sea battle  in sz12(2 spaces) to make way for the landing.  during combat, the fig from sz12 can land in the UK, the fig from algeria can land on the carrier, and the fig from caucasus can fly out on a strictly non-combat flight and land on the carrier in sz12 as well.

Note: an exception to both of these is if the transport or carrier has units owned by a friendly power on it (e.g., a US carrier carrying UK figs).  These are considered cargo and they just sit there for the ride during the turn the boat is moved.  They get on during their own turn. They must sit on the boat for 1 turn even if it doesn’t move. Then they can unload on their own next turn

also can somebody please explain how the strategic economic bombing works?

Strategic Bombing Raids (SBR) in 4 easy steps

1. during combat move, send a bomber to an enemy territory with an IC
2. During combat resolve any AA fire if necessary, then assuming you plane wasn’t shot down by AAs, roll 1 die for SBR damage
3. Whatever you rolled on that one die, take that many IPC’s away from that power and return them to the bank
4. land your bomber in friendly territory during non-combat like you would land any attacking plane

@dezrtfish:

Good gigity gigity goo, that chic is hot, I need to start watching more Sci-Fi Channel. :-o

Yeah, she’s enough to give you a Complex.

I didn’t know liberty ships were a half mile long each.  Learn something new everyday. ;)

@frood:

I believe they go to whoever captures them. That’s what I recall TripleA doing. This would certainly apply to an IC built in EEU by the UK, liberated by Germany and then taken by the US.

If however the AA is in a friendly territory that you are liberating, maybe then the AA would go back to to your ally.

So maybe the answer is that it depends on who is awarded control of the territory.

FWIW, TripleA actually gets this wrong.  I had a game where I captured SEU with the UK and the AA there turned green and became US controlled (the yanks had dropped it there during previous trading) instead of going over to the UK who now controlled the territory.  (At least the old Patched/hacked PBF version worked that way.  I haven’t had the opportunity to see how this is handled in the newer versions.)

@Gleemax:

Noncombat movement

Units that haven’t already moved their maximum range may be moved.  Aircraft used in combat must land in a friendly territory.

[emphasis added]

Are they ‘adjusting’ the rules here (allowing ships and tanks to withdraw from combat zones if they only moved 1)? or is this just sloppy writing on the part of the walkthrough designers.  This would represent a HUGE change in tactics.

There is a thread at triplea warclub about this problem.  It is possible that the dice servers got reported for sending spam emails and got shut down by the hosting company, at least for now.

A couple guys over there have spun up new dice servers using the MARTI code.  You can add properties files to your triplea dice server directories to use these new dice servers.  Having tested them both a little, I had better success with the e-lake (europe) one than I did with temporal, but YMMV.

Go here to see the thread and get the files.  The files show up on page 2 or 3 of the thread.

Hope that helps everyone who uses TripleA here!

In the Forum Help there are examples of the various BB codes there.  I noticed the samples for table cells shows boxes/borders around the cells, but when I try to use it it puts things in rows and columns, but not with borders (see example below).

| col1 | column 2 | #3 |
| Text 1.1 | t-1.2 | row 1 col 3 |
| a | b | c |
| x | y | z |

Is there something I can do to get the cell borders to show up on the forum-tables, or is there some sort of site configuration that does not allow this?  I was experimenting with some table-based things for the forum and I think the borders would make it much more readable.

I think the article said that the increased risk of STDs countered the cancer fighting benefits.

Someone has to fight cancer!