Naval question

thanks…

so I can move as many forces into china that I want, but I cannot build an industrial complex there because its not my land…got it…thanks

Or perhaps if shore fortifications were introduced, “sudden strike” bombardment could be reintroduced to keep the balance from shifting too far to defense for amphibious assaults…

as long as they can make it to the Sea Zone the Carrier is placed in.  Yes.  Just move them there in the Non Combat Movement phase.

Sorry about that…I don’t know what I was thinking when I posted. The dd would obviously cancel the sub’s special abilities.  Thanks for the clarification and reminder.

Kick ass. Thanks Krieghund.

Now only to do some math…I just spotted 3 bombers and 2 fighters within range aswell for the americans…Ouch

OK, so this whole debate arises from the rule that tells you to place one of your control markers under your AA gun if you move it into a territory controlled by a friendly power, correct?  There is no corresponding rule that says that if I capture your AA gun when I capture your territory you should place one of your control markers under it.  So, we have one fairly rare circumstance when I can capture your gun when it has your marker (in your ally’s territory) and another far more common one when I can capture your gun when it doesn’t have your marker (in your territory).  In neither case am I directed to retain the existing marker or place a new one.

In addition, the rules indicate that if you or your ally recapture the territory and AA gun, the ownership of both goes to the capturing power, or to original owner of the territory if it’s liberated.  No mention is made of returning the AA gun to its original owner.

Doesn’t that indicate that I get to keep the AA gun completely free of any strings tying it back to you?  And wouldn’t that include technology?

I still view the Allies with a slight adv b/c of the number of Round 1 attacks the Axis must do, particularly Egy.

As for bids, we didn’t use them in our tourney and the Allies are holding their own quite well.  I think they are up a few games thru 23 games.  It might be like 13-10 Allies right now.

In the League we do use bids, but that is also used to determine sides.  A lot of times both players may bid 0 and just let sides be chosen at random.

I did just post a few stats in the League Forum (thru the first 12 completed) in the discussion thread and the Allies hold a 7 - 5 Adv in wins.  Avg bid was 1.3, but 7 games were played with a 0 bid and 2 were played with a 1 bid.

@Rammstein:

Can Chinese units be placed on a territory that it just captured? ex. If China takes Manchuria with 1 Inf remaining, can it place its “purchased” Inf on it that turn?

Yes.

@Rammstein:

If so, can US planes land on a newly captured Chinese territory?

No.  The US and China share a turn, so planes from either nation can’t land in territories captured by either one on the same turn.

@Rammstein:

Does the 3 unit limit refer to Chinese or Allies units?

Chinese units only, including the Flying Tigers.

@Rammstein:

Can a US plane attack a German sub if a UK destroyer is present?

No.  The UK destroyer will not be involved in the battle, so it doesn’t enable the plane to hit the sub.

@Rammstein:

1 Sub attacks 1 Carrier w 2 Fighters, do the Fighters roll for defence?

No, since there is no defending destroyer.

@Rammstein:

Placing Fighters on newly built Carriers: you can place newly built Fighters on newly built Carriers, right?

Yes.

@Rammstein:

Do existing Fighters have to end their movement in the territory where the Carrier is to be placed, or do they simply land on the territory where the Factory producing the carrier is? This could be important if a Fighter is low on movement.

The fighters must end their movement in the sea zone in which the carrier will be placed.

@Rammstein:

Here’s a situation that has bothered me for a while:
Let’s say that Japan has 5 Transports in a SZ (a juicy target), next to that SZ they have 3 Battleships with Destroyers, Carriers, etc… it’s huge. One SZ away from this huge Jap fleet is 1 US Carrier w 1 Fighter, and 1 Destroyer. If the Jap Transports are 3 spaces away from the US fleet, the Jap Battleships etc 2 spaces, and 1 empty SZ in between, could you attack the huge Jap fleet with your Destroyer (the assumption being you could theoretically win any battle), and plan to move your Carrier into that SZ in NC Movement, while sending your Fighter to attack the Transports?
The best way I can put it is: can you sacrifice any given warship in order to send Fighters on a suicidal attack under the assumption that your Carrier will be in range in NC Movement? Obviously, it would be worth it for the US in this case. However, the US Destroyer will obviously die, and the US Fighter will have nowhere to land. In this case, does the plane “crash”, thus allowing the US to sacrifice some units for a big payoff, or is this situation not legal at all?

It’s legal.  As long as there is any chance whatsoever, no matter how remote, that the fighter will be able to land, the move is legal.

Check out the FAQ for further information.