EMERGENCY! Interceptors Rule Challenge! Please help ASAP

It is best to buy Mechs and can open and support Germany on the East Front. If the opportunity arises, and the U.K. and US player allow it, buy a DD to keep your convoying down. Don’t make it easy for the Allies to deny you income. German Fts often have to park in Rome to scramble to sink Subs.
Playing Italy is about bothering the Allies, forcing them to spend in the Med, when they want to go East, towards the ME.

@ShadowHAwk:

@wittmann:

1. Yes.
2. Yes. Each scrambling Fighter would get one roll of 4 to hit and sink one TT, with its cargo onboard. On the next turn the attacker could retreat any surviving Transports. (Or stay and try an be sunk again, naturally,)
3. A Sub is ignored, unless a Scramble happens, then it is in the fight.
You did realise, however, that a Sub forbids an amphibious assault, if the Transport(s) is not escorted?

Where is that rule in the book? I heared from it but in my game this weekend i could not find it.

Thought that transports can only ignore subs if they got a warship sailing with them.

See the rulebook:
@rulebook:

Transports
….
However, a transport is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy submarines unless at least 1 warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.

So the requirement of an escorting warship applies to the ability to unload troops (not to ignore a submarine).

HTH :-)

Wow never considered sending jap forces into the Middle East. Figured the would always have their hands full in the pacific. also sorry to teslas. I was not saying the plan was bad or you need to go to the Middle East. Just saying that it was an option for good income.

@Stauffenberg:

Reading and understanding the rules is one thing, not very hard to do. BUT remembering all of them and bringing them into context with each other is a lot more complicated and the practical experience playing Global shows that there a lot of small “problems” occuring due to the fact that the rules are clear, but complex and complected.

Just look at the FAQ here on the board and the rather huge amount of videos about Global, they show that there is a need for information beyond the rulebooks. Or at least for a rulebook that is not divided into 2 parts, with a few more examples giving practical advice.

Laws are another example of this sort of thing.  To really understand a piece of legislation, you of course need to start with the text of the law itself, but then you often need to add other things…for example the administrative regulations (if any) that govern the application of the law, and the jurisprudence surrounding the law that may have been generated when judges have ruled on court cases that have involved the law.  After laws are initially published in their official form by government printing offices, some of them probably get re-published by commercial publishers in annotated editions which contain both the text of the law itself (what it says) and accompanying legal commentary (providing an opinion on what the law means and how it is customarily applied).  YG’s project sounds like it’s along the lines of such an “annotated edition” and it would have the same kind of usefulness to A&A gamers as such annotated editions have for lawyers, law students, legal schloars and so forth.

I read this about Stuka:

The dive-bomber was a purpose-built aircraft, designed to drop bombs with pinpoint accuracy on frontline battlefield targets. To support their panzer offensives, the Germans developed close air support into an art form and the Stuka was central to this effort. The secret of German successes in this field was the close integration between air and ground units. Stuka squadrons worked hand-in-hand with ground units so they could intervene rapidly at the decisive point of the battlefield. These highly specialist squadrons were in the thick of the action and developed an impressive reputation. The need to fly deep into the heart of battle meant Stuka pilots suffered some of the highest casualty rates in the Luftwaffe, and as a consequence became some of the most highly decorated German servicemen. Hans-Ulrich Rudel was the most famous Stuka pilot and squadron commander of the war. He was also the most highly decorated German soldier of the war, being the only serviceman to receive the Knight’s Cross with Golden Oak Leaves with Swords and Diamonds.

This give the general tactics. Does Variable depiction a special case of the above Stuka tactics?

@Gargantua:

I’ve only asked about 4 times…

I wish you luck in your quest Y.G. :P

As soon as I get my copy, I’ll cut the sheets at the binding, and take it to staples for Scanning… but it will be a bit before it arrives.

Way to step up G, I will be waiting patiently for that file.

That does help a lot; thanks to all who responded to my questions!

@Pelanderfunk:

The Soviets get a 5 IPC bonus for being at war. In all of the global games I’ve played so far, the Soviet player has simply “declared war” on Japan on R1, regardless of whether or not they had plans to attack.

Is there any reason that the Soviets wouldn’t declare war on Japan as soon as they can? Is there any reason that being “at war” is a requirement of this NO if the Soviets can always be at war?

This has been addressed in the FAQ thread.  The Soviets have to be at war with either Germany or Italy in order to receive the 5 IPC bonus.  Of course, it would have been nice for the rulebook to say this directly.