Alternate Colonial Garrison #2

Another thought would be about which is going to be easier to replace for you country.  Subs are great fodder and replacing them is easier on the pocketbook than FIG’s or CV’s, and especially if you are Japan.  US can afford to usually replace that kind of loss, but most other countries can’t.

For 72 IPC’s, I’d go with a mix like ones mentioned earlier, with DD’s, CV’s (+FIG) & SS’s.  If split over a couple rounds, maybe SS/DD first in case of early strike

1.  Yes.  However, after 1 round of combat, the SUB can choose to submerge if it is still alive, ending the attack by the FIG (or BOM).

2.  NO.  The Battleship is offshore.  It can only engage in land combat for a single shot and only in the very special case of an amphibious landing.  In the example you cite, with Germany counter-attacking Western, the Allied BB is in SZ7, and means NOTHING to the Allied defenders in Western.  Battleships are naval units, and are ignored for land combat except in the case where the Battleship is in the same sea zone as the attacker’s transport(s) that are offloading to combat.

Also, DSTs (Destroyers) can only engage in land combat if you have the technology that permits them to fire a support shot like a Battleship.  Otherwise DSTs mean NOTHING in land combat.

Yea, NF and MPB are pretty darn good if you are encountering KJF.  Otherwise, MPB and Tokyo Express are better,IMHO.  (NF doesn’t work for bombardments, so they are very mitigated if America flees from Japanese supremacy in the Pacific.)

Banzai’s too nerfed in LHTR.  If it was more like how they are in enhanced, they’d be much better, IMHO.  (You can use them in conjunction with artillery, armor, fighters and bombers in enhanced, but not in LHTR.)

This really is wonderful!thanks a lot

@Craig:

@tekkyy:

Yeah I think over time the rules will become more logical.

Depend on which post you read (at harrisdesign) LHTR 2.0 was just short of some changes.
To me it should have been called LHTR 1.4 or something.

There are reasons (that will become quite evident eventually) why an thorough edit good was embarked upon and put forth as v2.0.

Craig

You know, I used the same reason at a bar posing as a government agent.

“Young miss, there are reasons - that will become quite evident eventually - why you must remove your underwear right here right now.”  8-)

“Orly?”  :?

“Yarly.  We is teh gub-mint.  We don’t lie.”  8-)

“Uhm, okay?”  :|

I’ve seen fast carriers help in 2 specific situations:

1)  Japan forgets that the Pearl Harbor Carrier and fighters can get to SZ 61 resulting in the loss of all of Japan’s unprotected transports.
2)  America builds one last carrier and two fighters for that assault on SZ 60 (SZ 55 to SZ 60 is 3 spaces.) Or even just buys two fast carriers so the 4 fighters in W. Canada can reach SZ 60.

But how often does that happen?

How much better off would naval warfare in the Pacific be if America had 3 fighters on the flight deck of a carrier, or could recover a bomber on an empty carrier?

They are nerfed in LHTR, but they still do better than regular bombers.  I’d still make sure I was extra aware of how many bombers my opponent had if they had this Technology:

Average IPC damage with regular bombers: 3.5IPC
Average IPC damage with heavy bombers: 5.5IPC

Chance of hitting with regular bombers on attack: 66.7%
Chance of hitting with heavy bombers on attack: 88.9%

oh, believe me, I love having ACs…I’ve been known to pull up along shore with 4-6 of them with 2 fighters each.

We even have a house rule that SS don’t exist, but you can have Super ACs which hold 3 fighters instead of 2. (you can actually fit 3 fighters on the deck too, if you’re careful!) It’s a beautiful site.

BTW, we also have a house rule that there are no chips. When you run out of pieces you can’t build anymore. smile