Two Questions (CV Defense and TRN stuff)

Generally, especially in the early game, ceding the territory is the way to go.

Rome landings realy arent much of a problem for Germany, as the opportunity cost of those units not punching thru Cairo are enormous.

Personally, I love to see USA extend his shuck in the early game, defending both SZ 12 and SZ 14 is very difficult without spending a bunch of (unnecessary) money on capital ships (BS and AC), and having enough trannies to do so efficiently is very expensive as well.  Every dollar USA spends on non-ground units is a boon to the Axis.

In Revised USA doesnt have an enormous monetary advantage, and so there is only so many things they can accomplish.

Keeping Paris stacked tall is far more important for keeping the Allies out of Europe for as long as possible.  A stack of Ftrs tere make USA extending past 12 very difficult.

haha, just bought Anniversary. get this, im taking the pieces out of the cases and getting things in their trays ready for gameday this weekend and I turn around and my dog is chomping on the edge of the cover box!!! 100 bucks and the corner of one box is ripped off. what a bummer. (though at least she wasnt munching on the board!)

anywho, im going to get revised this weekend as well. found a cool shop that has all the versions and im going to pick one up each week until I have the complete set!

Yes.  Air attacks (other than SBRs) work in the same way as any other attack.  The attack continues until one side or the other (or both) is destroyed, or the attacker retreats (or the defender submerges if it’s a sub).

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.

DF is correct.  And that is true for both OOB and LHTR rules.

@ShadowHAwk:

Eh but 2 does not state it has to be a combat move. And since submarines threat hostile seazones as friendly the zone is effectively not a hostile zone and number 3 allows the movement. I would say Yes to question 3 based on this. Moving through a friendly seazone is not considered a combat move and the SZ not containing destroyers is effectively a friendly seazone for a sub.

Well, I’d be willing to advocate both views. As I quoted submarines treat hostile sea zones as friendly, but that statement is under “combat movement phase”. Looking under “ncm phase” this is not repeated, in fact, it states that NO sea units may move through hostile sea zones EXCEPT in the case of enemy submerged submarines.

Might be worth looking more into, but I assume mostly for theoretical interest.

Under LHTR, in the description of AA guns, it does include a specific exception to AA guns ONLY moving in NCM when being carried on TRNs.

It is not 100% conclusive.  But it is more than enough to make me think that the AA gun does indeed offload in COMBAT movement (but of course cannot “attack” so it is ignored as a unit for the attacker).  If the Attacker wins the combat, they finish setting up the AA gun in NCM, and it protects the newly captured territory.  If the attacker is thrown back into the sea, the defender gains the AA gun.

At least, that is how I read it…

But it IS a simplification in terms of game mechanics.  And I recently LOST an argument where “game mechanics” won out over logic (see the topic Multinational Units on Attack).

Movement of each type occurs all at one time;  all combat movement occurs at once, all non-combat movement occurs after that, THEN the place units phase, then collecct income.  There is no non-combat movement of FIGs after unit placement, which the old rule REQUIRES.  That is the “simplification.”