Came up with an interesting scenario happened in a game last night.
G1 I killed UK battleship. I placed my destroyer and a sub in sea zone 3. Because I wasn’t sure on the semantics of the rules I warned the UK player- “if you try to transport into Norway your transport will auto-die”.
My reasoning being,
If I had just brought the destroyer, the UK player would have a chance to kill it with his planes and amphibious assault. If I had only brought the sub, he could ignore it and land. Since I brought both, he engages battles with the destroyer, bringing the sub into the battle. Since the planes can’t hit the subs, the subs get to shoot all day until the transport dies or retreats.
Was I right in this rule interpretation? Or does the battle end when the destroyer dies? Seems like an odd situation that may not have captured the intent of the rules.
In a related scenario, what if the planes killed the destroyer, leaving the sub in the sea zone, would a UK aircraft carrier be able to move to that sea zone in the non-combat move in order to land the planes there and ignore the sub? Or is it still considered hostile territory where a battle took place?
I am fairly certain that you can place your aircraft carrier there since the sub doesn’t prevent any kind of movement. Only surface warships stop that.
Sgt. Pavlov is right. The sea zone is no longer hostile.
FAQ link on the first page still doesn’t work,
and the rulebook pdf is still the same ugly, fuzzy, black&white, unreadable low quality scan that was there last time i looked.
Krieg, can you ask someone at hasbro / avalon-hill to release the official rulebook?
and if they are to lazy to do so, could someone please do a high quality color scan? (ie: at least 300 dpi, color, high quality)
thanks a ton,
veq
Q. On page 22 it says “in the event that you purchase more units than you can actually mobilize due to production limitations, you must return the over-produced units to the box (your choice on which units), and the cost of the reimbursed units is returned to you.”
I can see where this happens if I forget the production limit and build, say 10 infantry when my only industrial complex is in a territory with a value of 8? I understand then I get the 6 IPC cost back and return the 2 infantry into the box.
Does this mean that I don’t have to mobilize my units if I don’t want to? Or must I mobilize all of my purchased units that I am able to. I may only hold back units that I can’t mobilize because I don’t have sufficient production capacity like the in the above example.
I have tried out the GameTableOnline (Official or Uniofficial?) Version [ [u]gametableonline.com/welcome.php ] and this seems to be the case, however, that particular game version does not allow landings on Formosa [[b]Japan] and Iceland [[b]UK] held islands. Yet, all the other errata seems to have been corrected and understood with regards to other territorial issues.
Q. On page 22 it says “in the event that you purchase more units than you can actually mobilize due to production limitations, you must return the over-produced units to the box (your choice on which units), and the cost of the reimbursed units is returned to you.”
I can see where this happens if I forget the production limit and build, say 10 infantry when my only industrial complex is in a territory with a value of 8? I understand then I get the 6 IPC cost back and return the 2 infantry into the box.
Does this mean that I don’t have to mobilize my units if I don’t want to? Or must I mobilize all of my purchased units that I am able to. I may only hold back units that I can’t mobilize because I don’t have sufficient production capacity like the in the above example.
You have to place all the units you bought, if you have enough production capacity for all of them.
“in the event that you purchase more units than you can actually mobilize”
The only way this would happen is if you’re not paying attention to the game you are playing right? You couldn’t lose an Industrial Complex on your own turn correct? It seems like a very odd, or rather common sense, thing to put into the rulebook, right?
It must be in the rules because there are other alternatives for handling the situation. The player making the error could simply have been penalized by losing the unplaceable units, or they could have been held in reserve for placement in a later turn.
I can imagine a situation where a player might exploit this rule. Say that you have 36 IPC on hand and can only place 8 units, then you could buy 7 infantry and 3 tanks, and await the combat results before deciding which units to place.
Admittedly, this is rather far-fetched and unlikely to occur in practical play.
It must be in the rules because there are other alternatives for handling the situation. The player making the error could simply have been penalized by losing the unplaceable units, or they could have been held in reserve for placement in a later turn.
That is very true. For good sportmanship though, it would make sense not to penalize the player for an error like that. I wouldn’t agree with the purchased units being held in reserve, because the opposing players would see this and could purchase to counter what you have to place accordingly.
@Herr:
…imagine… you have 36 IPC on hand and can only place 8 units, then you could buy 7 infantry and 3 tanks, and await the combat results before deciding which units to place…this is …unlikely to occur in practical play.
Here’s the situation I have been running into:
Germany has 40 IPC.
2 Battleships are purchased costing 20 IPC each.
Combat occurs and 8 Tanks are destroyed.
Germany now realizes the Battleships are not needed, and so returns them to get the 40 IPC in order to possibly purchase 8 Tanks on its next turn.
According to the rulebook, this unmobilization of units cannot be allowed because Germany has the ability to place the 2 Battleships, correct?
I’ve always thought that once you have purchased the units, i.e. a Battleship, the keel has been laid but the ship is not complete.
After a losing combat, Hitler orders the Battleships to be diassembled and scrapped and the metal is to be shipped back to Germany to be used to used for more Panther Tanks.
Thus, when you mobilize the units after the Non-Combat Movement phase, the units are now completed (some 3 to 6 months after the keel was laid).
Germany has 40 IPC.
2 Battleships are purchased costing 20 IPC each.
Combat occurs and 8 Tanks are destroyed.
Germany now realizes the Battleships are not needed, and so returns them to get the 40 IPC in order to possibly purchase 8 Tanks on its next turn.
According to the rulebook, this unmobilization of units cannot be allowed because Germany has the ability to place the 2 Battleships, correct?
Yes, that’s correct - you must place the battleships. You’re right that in reality, it may be possible to reassign some of the materials (though not all of them) to the production of different units, but the rules won’t allow that. Therefore, in the example that I gave, it was financially possible to buy all the units mentioned, but they couldn’t be placed due to production limits, and you can choose which units to place and which ones to return.
So here’s another totally unlikely scenario abusing the rule:
Alright, I’m totally ruining the intent of this thread by dreaming up crazy exploits instead of providing clear explanations. My bad! :-D
It must be in the rules because there are other alternatives for handling the situation. The player making the error could simply have been penalized by losing the unplaceable units, or they could have been held in reserve for placement in a later turn.
That is very true. For good sportmanship though, it would make sense not to penalize the player for an error like that. I wouldn’t agree with the purchased units being held in reserve, because the opposing players would see this and could purchase to counter what you have to place accordingly.
@Herr:
…imagine… you have 36 IPC on hand and can only place 8 units, then you could buy 7 infantry and 3 tanks, and await the combat results before deciding which units to place…this is …unlikely to occur in practical play.
Here’s the situation I have been running into:
Germany has 40 IPC.
2 Battleships are purchased costing 20 IPC each.
Combat occurs and 8 Tanks are destroyed.
Germany now realizes the Battleships are not needed, and so returns them to get the 40 IPC in order to possibly purchase 8 Tanks on its next turn.
According to the rulebook, this unmobilization of units cannot be allowed because Germany has the ability to place the 2 Battleships, correct?
I’ve always thought that once you have purchased the units, i.e. a Battleship, the keel has been laid but the ship is not complete.
After a losing combat, Hitler orders the Battleships to be diassembled and scrapped and the metal is to be shipped back to Germany to be used to used for more Panther Tanks.
Thus, when you mobilize the units after the Non-Combat Movement phase, the units are now completed (some 3 to 6 months after the keel was laid).
The question is game mechanics and fairness, not real life possibilities.
When you purchase the units, you don’t know the results of your combat phase (how many units you’ll lose, if you’ll take key territories, etc.).
If you’re changing your purchases after combat takes place then you’ll have an unfair advantage over your opponent since you’re actually adjusting your buy (even if it is only to receive the IPCs back) to the result of your combat phase.
It can be argued that a big mistake had been done already with the purchase and that changing the order is a way to minimize the error but you learn how to play better when you suffer the full consequences of such mistakes.
It can be argued that a big mistake had been done already with the purchase and that changing the order is a way to minimize the error but you learn how to play better when you suffer the full consequences of such mistakes.
This is very true, although, I saw the non-mobilization of units to be a severe disadvantage even after absorbing such combat losses as well.
It’s a severe disadvantage only if it was not intended…… It has happened to me that an opponent over built as England, but not somebody who plays the game more than once or twice a year. He saved his money to purchase an instant fleet and didn’t build land units to go with the transports on a previous turn. I initially let him get his over build IPCs back, but the strategic disadvantage was huge, so huge I let him retroactively build some land units, but I’m a good sport that way.
Now had he tried exploit Herr KaLeun laid out with the 8 Inf/CV, I’d probably punch him in the mouth, or at the very least not offer him a refill on his rye and ginger…
Just wanting to verify something…
Sea fleets from different nations don’t defend together right?
Just asking because I’ve been reading a lot of allied strat and I see combining UK/US fleets often.
Now, I know that US fighters on UK carrier will defend the carrier if G attacks the AC.
But would a US battleship defend a UK battleship if G attacks the UK battleship?
No right?
Side question, BB=Battleship right? And… why 2 Bs? Just don’t want to use BS?
Nvm the main question about Sea defense, I just misread the manual I think
Side question, BB=Battleship right? And… why 2 Bs? Just don’t want to use BS?
BB is the US Navy classification symbol for Battleships. CV for carriers, etc.
Hey all,
on p. 24 of the rulebook (unit profiles) it says that artillery will support infantry and increase it’s attack to 2. My question is: when an artillery unit supports an infantry unit to attack with 2, can it also attack with 2 for itself? In that case it would fire 2 times, 1 in support of the infantry and 1 for its own attack, is this possible?
The infantry and artillery each fire once. Each unit hits on a 2 or less.
