1. DarthMaximus
2. DutchmanD
3. DY
4. DesertJournalist
5. Zygmund
6. Telamon
7. Bigbadgoo
8. SgtBlitz
9. Pin
10. Questioneer
11. TimTheEnchanter
12. Omega
13. Bardoly
14. Gargantua
15. Lynxes
16. Perrys!
17. Joe Cold
18. KGB
19. Todd7912
20. HannibalSW
21. katfishkris
22. souL
23. Apollo
24. DemolitionMan
25. a44bigdog
26. Mistergreen
27. P@nther
28. Botider
29. JWW
30. PGMatt
31. hobo
32. Yasha
I’ll take a stab :-D
Thanks for the quick reply. I initially thought the same way as Ogre…only defending warships need to be cleared :oops:
I have a question on attacking a seazone and having amphibious assault afterwards. If I attack a seazone with a cv, 2 ftrs, and dd and the defender chooses to lose the dd and CV, can I break off the attack with my attacking warships and conduct amphibious assault since there are no defending surface ships left?
Looking to start a new '41 game with NOs. A friend of mine wants to try out the Axis so we’re looking for either a 2vs2 or even 5 player game with 2-3 Allied players.
I’ll join if there’s room.
@murray: very true, but remember the oceans are MUCH more vast than the board lets on.
@Jennifer, I think 8 IPC may be fair. 1:1 vs destroyer and/or tweak some of the rules a bit I guess. I don’t think it will complicate a battle more but adds a little more strategy. Do you lose a sub and first strike ability or lose your cruiser/fighter which have better hit factors? As it is now, it’s obvious (90%) what you will lose first in battle.
JMHO
Oh, in case this makes subs too powerful, raise their IPC cost back to 7 if needed.
Hi there,
Don’t know if this has been brought up before but looking it from a common sense aspect (and I’m no AA expert :-D ), doesn’t it make more sense that 1 destroyer should only be allowed to negate/detect 1 sub on a 1 for 1 basis? This would allow for the return of true wolf packs and make subs more deadly than now. It’s bogus that 1 destroyer can allow 100 ftrs to attack and kill, for example, 100 subs and the subs can only kill the destroyer?! This should at least be optional rule imo! Whatcha all think?
test
Rolls: 2@1 3@3 4@4; Total Hits: 42@1: (2, 6)3@3: (2, 3, 5)4@4: (5, 3, 3, 6)