Thanks!

Quick question regarding this errata:

“The United States begins the game neutral. It may not declare war on Japan unless Japan first declares war on it or makes
an unprovoked declaration of war against the United Kingdom or ANZAC. Following any such unprovoked
declaration of war by Japan, the United States will receive an immediate one-time bonus payment of 30
IPCs, representing the total mobilization and transfer of military assets within the continental United
States. However, if the United States is still not at war with Japan by the Collect Income phase of its third
turn, it may declare war on Japan at the beginning of that phase. This is an exception to the rules for
declaring war (see “Declaring War,” page 11), which may normally be done only at the beginning of the
Combat Move phase.” (Note that this change applies only to the Pacific rules, and not to the Global
rules.)”

Does the USA still get this if they remain neutral? For example if Japan DOWs UK/Anzac but not USA, and USA chooses to remain neutral?

I thought it was kind of funny when Ray mentioned he needed to listen to a hockey game on the radio when he was working stuff (he said fig painting), because when I need something to listen to when I’m working on stuff, I go to Dicetruction!

How long did 1:10-1:11 land you in the doghouse?  :-o

@Maofator:

knp7765,
My vision would be like you said, 6 IPCs (half the minor factory cost).  I would say first off a recruitment would be considered a factory of sorts.  Therefor, no other “factory” could exist in the same territory.  With that said there should be a limit I suppose of say 3 units per turn.  For game play purposes I would say these units could be captured by enemy players.  The issue with the Xeno rules and other similar variants is that is slows the game down.  It creates an almost trench warfare feel to the game.Â

If no factory is allowed (which makes sense), can a recruitment centre be upgraded to a minor factory?  8ipc?  26ipc to go straight to major?

@Gamerman01:

@allweneedislove:

can japan load a transport into a newly hostile seazone on their combat move, if japan declared war at the beginning of it’s turn?

YES.  Any nation can load transports in newly hostile seazones if the nation just declared war on that enemy at the beginning of that turn.  This is the only exception to the rule that you can’t load transports in hostile zones.

Provided the transport started the turn in that sea zone, IIRC.  It cannot move into it and then load.

Land units cannot retreat from an amphibious assault once landed.  This is a retreat from a naval battle.  The amphibious assault never happened.

Correct.  Also worth noting, China is not allowed to repair damaged air and naval bases.

I believe all the replies apply to Alpha 3 and 2nd ed which is what most here play.  In 1st ed OOB Germany itself starts with a minor factory that can be upgraded.  Actually, I think in 1st ed OOB that you can build a major in ANY 3 ipc+ territory.

No.  Load on turn X, unload on X+1 even when bridging.

It may seem strange at first, but it makes sense when you look at this way:  If bridging was allowed on the same turn, 20 American infantry could land in Normandy by bridging from the UK on turn X using their own US transports.  Then on their turn X, the british send over another 20 infantry on the same US transports.  The Anzacs (for some reason) have 8 inf in the UK so they bridge them on their turn.  Then on the French turn they send over their 2 infantry that start the game in the UK. So…10 transports have landed 50 inf in one space in one turn, all before Germany could react.  Impressive, but devastating to the German player. � The need to buy transport by the allies would also drop greatly and that extra money they saved would further imbalance the game by allowing them to buy much more aircraft, etc.

@MrBill13:

In real life, a sub would get one chance to get a surprise attack on an enemy, would take it and get the heck out of there. If they hung around any ship - cruisers, battleships and even carriers had the capability to take out a sub. So this just doesn’t make any logical sense…

It actually does make sense.  The game is abstact, not literal.  In other words, don’t think of the battle in a sea zone as a single engagement. Those turns are months long. Let’s say a single battle involving 2 subs and a battleship goes 3 rounds.  It would be unrealistic for the battleship to be surprised if all 3 rounds occured in one hour of real life, agreed.  But perhaps each round of rolling (within that one player turn) is days, weeks, or even a month apart, with the subs firing and disengaging each time and returning for another pass when they are confident of their advantage.  A sub getting a surprise attack in each round always seemed reasonable to me because of the scale of the game.