Nice! thank you!
Unit Placement
-
Sorry if this has already been covered - I haven’t seen it though…
In Revised, you could place new naval units in a seazone (adjacent to an IC of course) that enemy ships occupied. Is the same true for AA50?
(I hope not - I really hate that rule!)
Thanks! -
Yes, it’s still there.
-
(Rats…)
Thanks Krieghund!
One more question - Is production of a beginning IC still limited to that territory’s value, like Revised?
-
One more question - Is production of a beginning IC still limited to that territory’s value, like Revised?
Yup.
-
Sorry if this has already been covered - I haven’t seen it though…
In Revised, you could place new naval units in a seazone (adjacent to an IC of course) that enemy ships occupied. Is the same true for AA50?
(I hope not - I really hate that rule!)
Thanks!Unless you occupied all the ports, how could you prevent a power from launching new sea units. You could blockade a port or two, but a whole country’s?
-
Sorry if this has already been covered - I haven’t seen it though…
In Revised, you could place new naval units in a seazone (adjacent to an IC of course) that enemy ships occupied. Is the same true for AA50?
(I hope not - I really hate that rule!)
Thanks!Unless you occupied all th eports, how could you prevent a power from launching new sea units. You could blockade a port or two, but a whole country’s?
I’m not following you squirecam - what do you mean…? :?
Thanks. -
Man i wish the starting set up was “ghost” into the map so it would prove an easy set up.
-
Sorry if this has already been covered - I haven’t seen it though…
In Revised, you could place new naval units in a seazone (adjacent to an IC of course) that enemy ships occupied. Is the same true for AA50?
(I hope not - I really hate that rule!)
Thanks!Unless you occupied all th eports, how could you prevent a power from launching new sea units. You could blockade a port or two, but a whole country’s?
I’m not following you squirecam - what do you mean…? :?
Thanks.One BB or DD should not be able to blockade/prevent another country’s ability to build new ships…
-
Sorry if this has already been covered - I haven’t seen it though…
In Revised, you could place new naval units in a seazone (adjacent to an IC of course) that enemy ships occupied. Is the same true for AA50?
(I hope not - I really hate that rule!)
Thanks!Unless you occupied all th eports, how could you prevent a power from launching new sea units. You could blockade a port or two, but a whole country’s?
I’m not following you squirecam - what do you mean…? :?
Thanks.One BB or DD should not be able to blockade/prevent another country’s ability to build new ships…
Okay, now I understand what you mean. I agree with you - I just don’t like the rule. :|
Thanks. -
In WW2, the US built submarines, LSTs, and both the US and Canada built escort craft in the Great Lakes. Would it be possible for the US and the UK to build and place submarines, transports, and destroyers in the Great Lakes, and then move them to either Sea Zone 9 (the mouth of the St. Lawrence River) or Sea Zone 10 on the Gulf Coast (moving them down the Mississippi River) with one additional Sea Zone of movement? Would this also be possible in Revised and Classic?
-
In WW2, the US built submarines, LSTs, and both the US and Canada built escort craft in the Great Lakes. Would it be possible for the US and the UK to build and place submarines, transports, and destroyers in the Great Lakes, and then move them to either Sea Zone 9 (the mouth of the St. Lawrence River) or Sea Zone 10 on the Gulf Coast (moving them down the Mississippi River) with one additional Sea Zone of movement? Would this also be possible in Revised and Classic?
this will only be possible in the House rule section
-
In WW2, the US built submarines, LSTs, and both the US and Canada built escort craft in the Great Lakes. Would it be possible for the US and the UK to build and place submarines, transports, and destroyers in the Great Lakes, and then move them to either Sea Zone 9 (the mouth of the St. Lawrence River) or Sea Zone 10 on the Gulf Coast (moving them down the Mississippi River) with one additional Sea Zone of movement? Would this also be possible in Revised and Classic?
Adlertag’s right. The Great Lakes aren’t game spaces in Classic, Revised or Anniversary.
-
@Imperious:
Man i wish the starting set up was “ghost” into the map so it would prove an easy set up.
I have seen that on some home-made maps and it is very nice.
perhaps there might have been some tweaking involved in unit placement that they thought it was a good idea to not make a map with them printed there in case changes were needed?
-
They just aren’t thinking ahead. At least they should redo the set up sheets to make have a card with the picture of the map with the setup printed on it, so you don’t have to look for the territories in columns and index it with the type of unit. That takes alot longer and its way less efficient.
-
I could see a problem with this on the board as we have two set ups for the game. Besides does it take that long to learn the set ups? I never look at the cards anymore when I resent my revised board.
-
I could see a problem with this on the board as we have two set ups for the game. Besides does it take that long to learn the set ups? I never look at the cards anymore when I resent my revised board.
You have a good point there, Bigdog. Having the map preprinted with setups when you have two different set ups could lead to some confusion.
Suggested Topics
