I’m curious - did Triple A not give you the ability to declare war and make the combat move to Burma?
It did not.
@Cmdr:
Each sub can make its own independent submerge decision. � So you could submerge some subs in the combat zone, and then in a later round retreat the rest to the same sea zone (a different sea zone than the combat where the submerged subs stay), effectively splitting them up.
And you can sail them around the Pacific without any of the 50 Japanese aircraft being able to attack them without a destroyer! � Subs are awesome!
Yea, to bad 1 destroyer lets 500 strategic bombers attack 1200 submarines. Seems off in that regard, but rules be rules and you be stuck with the rules!
And 1 sub can sink 1,000,000 transports by itself, with zero risk :-)
@seththenewb:
I’m curious - did Triple A not give you the ability to declare war and make the combat move to Burma?
It did not.
Added to list :-)
@Cmdr:
Each sub can make its own independent submerge decision. ��So you could submerge some subs in the combat zone, and then in a later round retreat the rest to the same sea zone (a different sea zone than the combat where the submerged subs stay), effectively splitting them up.
And you can sail them around the Pacific without any of the 50 Japanese aircraft being able to attack them without a destroyer! ��Subs are awesome!
Yea, to bad 1 destroyer lets 500 strategic bombers attack 1200 submarines.� Seems off in that regard, but rules be rules and you be stuck with the rules!
And 1 sub can sink 1,000,000 transports by itself, with zero risk� :-)
The admiral responsible for leaving a million transports by themselves and ripe for a lone sub ought to be put in for an award for by his opponents. Also, that sub must’ve been modded for unlimited ammo. :wink:
@seththenewb:
I’m curious - did Triple A not give you the ability to declare war and make the combat move to Burma?
It did not.
Added to list :-)
Awesome sauce, thanks!
If I am doing a sea battle against a carrier, two transports, two fighters and a tac with 3 bombers and 2 subs, can my bombers retreat and leave the subs to sink the transports once the carrier is gone?
NO
All units must retreat at the same time.However, subs can SUBMERGE individually, round by round.
Separate retreating is ONLY done with amphibious assaults, where the ground units coming off transports can never retreat, but everything else can retreat AT THE SAME TIME, together (and ground units to the same place)
What you can do with subs when your opponent has no destroyers, is leave them in the battle as long as possible by taking your air off first. Once you have only subs in the battle, that takes all their defending air out of the battle and you may be able to sink all their transports that way.
Subs are awesome, especially with the 6 IPC cost and double convoy damage. :-)
So hope that your opponent takes carrier hits with your bomber hits, and then lose your bombers first, if you want a good chance of sinking all the boats. Your opponent may be wise (depending on game situation) to take off his defending air if your bombers hit, and save the carriers, which are his only defense against the subs to protect not only themselves, but the transports.
A lot depends on whether his air has another safe landing place… But that’s how it works -
Let me know if anything is still unclear
Thank you sir…it was perfectly clear. I went ahead and finished the battle.
@seththenewb:
The admiral responsible for leaving a million transports by themselves and ripe for a lone sub ought to be put in for an award for by his opponents. Also, that sub must’ve been modded for unlimited ammo. Â :wink:
It’s called the Infinity Torpedo. :P
But then, there have always been silly rules that make no sense, but seem to keep the game units from being something other than insanely over powered (except Classic Heavy Bombers. :P )
It is just for game balance purposes.
England and France are allies in Europe from the start of the game. Does this imply that England may move into French Indo-China Burma and/or New Hebrides (that cruddy little island group NO ONE probably ever uses) with impunity? (ANZAC to for that matter since they literally are part of the British Empire I would assume, just a separate economy?)
For that matter, assuming they can (and I don’t see why they shouldn’t be able too) what if England is in there, does Japan have to declare war on FIC to get them out? (Like that’s a deterrent! Oh no, I have to declare war on a power that has at most ONE destroyer here!)
Any Ally who is at war (the caveat for USSR and USA) (but of course, not China) can move into FIC, so this includes ANZ and UK Pacific
You must declare war on a power that has units in a territory (not a sea zone) to combat move into it, so yes Japan has to declare war on the UK/ANZ to invade FIC when a UK/ANZ unit is in FIC.
Does Russia get the 3 bonus IPCs for controlling Axis provinces in Africa also or just Europe. Can I get the extra bonus for Russia by taking over the worthless Italian provinces in Africa? I did this in a game and Russia is making mad loot from it. Did I read the rules wrong?
Thanks,
Does Russia get the 3 bonus IPCs for controlling Axis provinces in Africa also or just Europe.
Africa too
Can I get the extra bonus for Russia by taking over the worthless Italian provinces in Africa?
YES
I did this in a game and Russia is making mad loot from it. Did I read the rules wrong?
Thanks,
Crazy, isn’t it!? Don’t forget Sardinia and Sicily! :lol:
Seriously though, if you send Russian ground unit(s) to Africa (or Sardinia/Sicily) and can manage to take control of these territories with Russia, you earned your money.
Also, watch out that you don’t take it over just a turn or two before losing Moscow…
You do know the pro-Axis neutrals count as well, right?
Iraq, Bulgaria, Finland…
For an amphibious assault from a seazone with an enemy sub present, would an escorting sub suffice to allow the invasion go through? Or does it have to be a surface warship with an attack value?
any warship, period. that is everything but a transport. now if a scramble occurs, then you need something that can kill the sub to be present.
As a tag along to this, does a carrier count in this case? Ie are either of these possible
enemy sub in sz42 - attacker brings in a loaded transport accompanied by a sub of the same nation to take Java
enemy sub in sz42 - attacker brings in a loaded transport accompanied by a carrier of the same nation to take Java
Bold, I’m not sure about the sub but I’m pretty sure that your carrier isn’t enough.
Transports
Cost: 7
Attack: 0
Defense: 0
Move: 2
Unit Characteristics
No Combat Value: Even though a transport can attack
or defend, either alone or with other units, it has a
combat value of 0. This means that a transport can’t fire
in the attacking units’ or the defending units’ fire steps.
Transports may not attack without being accompanied
by at least 1 unit with an attack value, unless they are
conducting an amphibious assault from a friendly sea
zone that is free of enemy submarines.
Page 32 of Europe Manual 2nd ED
A carrier does not have attack power.
Here’s the catch though. It says that they HAVE to be accompanied by at least 1 unit with an attack value UNLESS they’re doing an amphibious assault from a friendly SZ that is free of enemy subs. It’s there in black and white, I’m not sure how much clearer it can get.
@seththenewb:
No Combat Value: Even though a transport can attack
or defend, either alone or with other units, it has a
combat value of 0. This means that a transport can’t fire
in the attacking units’ or the defending units’ fire steps.
Transports may not attack without being accompanied
by at least 1 unit with an attack value, unless they are
conducting an amphibious assault from a friendly sea
zone that is free of enemy submarines.
It’s obviously not talking about conducting naval combat for the second part because an enemy sub alone does not make a seazone hostile.
Im sure krieg can explain it :-)
Im almost certain that krieg will say the operative word is “attack”. Ie the transport is not attacking if unloading in a zone with an enemy sub and an escorting acc.
