Who to pre-order from?

@zbox

Hi zbox

If G scrambles, that creates a naval battle. All units must participate in the naval battle. So, can’t bombard. No scramble there is no naval battle, so can bombard.

Note
In a situation with a just a sub or a trprt, those could be ignored, no naval battle and you can bombard.
If you wanted to sink them though, that creates a naval battle and no bombard.

Panther will probably explain it a little more precisely :)

Thank you very much Panther. This clarifies the question.

It did change in some of the Alpha+N rulesets but the official rules have been pretty static since 2nd Ed.

The pleasure was on my part, Black_Elk.
I like to find ideas and optimized them inside specific guidelines.
These last one was invented while writing on it, never know that something that I found also interesting could come out of it!

However, it needs someone like you to come with the big picture and completely outside the box ideas.

I will be watching for feedback from your game-plays.

See you around.
Baron

@Sid:

France offered to hold their action so that Germany could go immediately, thus allowing Italy and Germany to coordinate more fluidly, instead of interrupting to state they were doing nothing and causing a multiple day delay between Italy and Germany.

If the players agreed to the change in order, the agreement should stand.  Why should the Axis assume France would not make the attack if the order has been changed.  Have the online moves been being submitted as if France was going in it’s original order?

It was not an agreement that the turn order was different.  That would have constituted a house rule and why would France give up the right to screw up the Axis plan forevermore in perpetuity?  No, it was a contingent offer that if Italy did nothing to instigate an attack by France, then Germany could be allowed to move so as not to slow down the game.

What round?

@kcdzim:

@Rorschach:

Consider it that the fighter escorts would have peeled away before they get to the actual facility (lack of range and/or their job of defending the bombers against interceptors is already acomplished so no need to risk going down from AA gun fire as well).

Thinking of it like that makes sense to me.  Interceptors would be intercepting as far AWAY from the facility as they possibly can, while the AA gun is fixed AT the facility.

Not to mention that AA flak is rather indiscriminate.  If it were firing on the escort, it would be firing on the interceptors as well, and the dogfight would be occuring in the thick of the flak.  And that’s not what the defender would want to do (and it would suck in the game cause the defender might lose more than the attacker due to friendly fire).  Especially since it’s the escorts duty to peel the interceptors away from the bombers and NOT keep the dogfight in the same area.

Yes, I was going to go into a much more detailed explanation including all this but time was a restraint (I was at work when I made that reply).

Really, it just makes sense if you think about it.  :)

If your (fixed position) AA guns are firing into the skies, it’s too late to scramble interceptors as this means the bombers are already over their targets AND you’d hit your own interceptors just as often as you’d  hit the enemy bombers.  Escorting fighters would have turned back before entering AA gun range so as to mitigate losses (once the bombers are over their target, no need to risk losing extra fighters that aren’t going to help out in the raid)!  AND, once the bombers are dropping their payload, what’s the point of intercepting them anyway as the damage is already done!

I had an email from them with a confirmation number to track last Thursday.  I’d email them