Board question

A)  As for the submarines, part 1 applies.  Let the submarines die so your surface ship gets more shots at the British air force (which I view as their navy, given that they are an island.)

B)  Given the location of Western Europe, leaving the fighters there makes the best sense.  They prevent the British from landing (and the Americans in round 2+) while still being used to pound the Russians.  Again, part 1 applies until Japan is in position to take over, then Part 2.  4 Ground units should be fine round 1, but review the board each round and up the defense as needed.

C) In general, keep parts 1 and 2 in your mind and act accordingly to the position on the board.  If you need to pull of Russia and start turtling in round 5, do it.  If you dont need to until round 7, then dont.  But certain things always apply:

1)  never let the Allies have Western Europe.
2)  Never let the Allies get Southern Europe
3)  Is self explanatory, derive from 1 and 2.
4)  Geramny’s goal is to inflict damage, Japan’s goal is to take Russia.  Not a hard and fast rule, but a good guideline.
5)  If you go navy with Germany, you will have to keep building up to keep it.  Personally, I dont recommend it unless you are strong with Japan.
6)  Tanks are good defenders.  I like stacks of 5 or 6 infantry and a tank in forward areas against the Russians.  It’s big enough that Russia has to invest heavily in winning, but small enough that Germany can recover the losses. (It’s economics, like the cold war.  Spend them into submission!)

You don’t have to take the fighter first.  It’s perfectly legal to take the carrier and leave the fighter stranded.  In order for the fighter’s move to not be a suicide mission, the only requirement is that it have a possible place to land (assuming the defender never hits).  Once the battle actually starts, it’s up to the owning player which casualties are taken.

The rules dealing with suicide missions address movement only.  There is nothing in the rules that indicates that casualties must be taken in a certain order to preserve fighters’ landing spaces.

@Kaine:

Can england use its transports to move out of the hostile zone, pick up troops, and then move back in to the hostile zone (and then conduct an amphibious assault as normal if the subs are defeated) or must the transports, if they retreat, end up in a friendly sea zone?

Yes, this is legal, as long as the sea zone in which the transports are loading units is friendly.

@Kaine:

Further (and related) are there ANY restrictions on movement caused by starting in a hostile zone rather than a friendly?

The movement must be done in the Combat Movement phase.  It must follow all of the rules for Combat Movement, except that it need not end in combat.

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.

They probably had so much vodka in their blood they were putting the shells in backwards.

@Jennifer:

In that case they are +4 IPC for Caucasus that turn.  However, they are not in an tactical advantage and Russia has suffered no loss for loosing it.

Net:  Russia Tactical Advantage with larger then normal stack in W. Russ.  IPC Gain +2 (WR)
Net:  Germany at no advantage, IPC gain of 4 in Cauc, IPC loss of 2 WR, net 2 IPC gain, tactical disadvantage due to larger then normal stack in WRuss.

The way I see it, Germany gains +4 IPC from the territory, and +1 IPC from the 1/3 chance of killing a unit with minimum value 3 IPC (one infantry), so net +5 IPC for investment of +3 IPC.  Germany also benefits from tying down the UK bomber for that turn, which is not trivial; a UK bomber can do a lot of damage to valuable naval units.

The Allies gain a tactical advantage from killing a forward placed German infantry, as well as the fact that the UK, not Russia, depleted Germany’s forces, which in turn allows Russia’s forces to mass and therefore be more efficient.

Russia gains nothing by holding West Russia because I believe Russia should hold West Russia until Germany has heavily massed at Ukraine.  That is, Russia should probably be holding West Russia anyways.

Concur with Sankt here  (who is becoming a very high grade “go to” person for answers on LHTR)