Rule question: Trading.

Wasn’t really talking about Balancing of it, just thinking about how it would look. I’d say EE would be Soviet because as you said, Stalin had annexed the Baltic Republics, and Eastern Poland, both of which lie in EE. Also when Looking at GER its bigger than Germany actually is because it includes the Western half of Poland, and Czech which at this point Hitler had Annexed.

That was a poor choice of words.  It’s being corrected now.

Transport cannot have more than it load limit at any time.  If Transport full of Allied units, no new units can be bridged with Transport.

But if United Kingdom have units on United States transport that United Kingdom offload, then United States use Transport on their move is OK.

did you trade your new paint brush for some mojo ?  theres only 1 original MOJO  :mrgreen:

Submarine have to face a round of fire from the attacking aircraft, then, if it has not been hit, at the end of the round it can submerge.

All Submerged submarines resurface at the end of the turn of the power in which turn they had been submerged. Example: UK aircraft attack a German submarine and miss. The German submarine then submerges. The submarine resurfaces at the end of the UK turn.

Well, the fighter CAN attack with ground troops might be a better way to put it.  It is up to the player what they want to assign to a battle.

For example, if you have to fight through enemy ships to do an amphibous landing, you can choose whether to have the fighters attack the enemy ships OR participate in the ground battle afterwards.

@ncscswitch:

I like the logging option.

I know I did not care for the argument that brought the issue up.  And it would be nice to have had a way to drop you a note and say “Hey!  What were thsoe dice?” :-)

Okay, I have created a “Make game record page” which creates records that AACalc will soon be able to log to - another couple hours coding should do it. This also incorporates an optional bidding function.

One question that was raised about bidding in software development forum was whether we should use an “Ebay” style bid where the winning bidder gets their optimal bid - ie. if you bid 0 and the other guy bid 10, then you would get it for 9 - so your bid is how low you are willing to go, but you don’t necessarily have to go that low. It’s an interesting concept, and I could just make a choice on my page for which bid system to use.

Thoughts? Would A&A.org consider switching to this bid? It would make the bid less nerve-racking because you know you won’t be leaving money “on the table”. Eg. I just bid 7 for my round 2 game against a player who took the bid for 10 in round 1. If he bid 10 again this time, I could have had it for 9. Of course with that you can’t declare your bid placement with your bid (or you could just get the change in $ to the bank) because you don’t know exactly what it will be yet.

Well I realize you don’t just use fighters alone, you use them in conjunction with inf as powerful back up. :wink: