@hbg-gw-enthusiast If you have adobe acrobat (the paid version) you can build a search index and include everything. Actually I might make one and upload it. You’ll probably need to get Adobe Reader (free) though.
@noneshallpass You can’t copy paste because the author has secured the document so you are unable to copy it, edit it, etc. It would be nice to have the PDF not have this locked down.
I guess ill officially chime in, Victoria BC Canada. Got a group I game with and would be glad to have a couple more when this pandemic blows over.
@sjelso Yup, subs are hard to kill, especially advanced subs.
However by the time adv. subs arrive, odds are there are long range aircraft facing them, which means they are facing medium bombers with a MAP range of 2.
@captainnapalm The line gets a +1. Basically all your defence rolls are now doing D6 + 1 (plus any other modifiers).
Also ensure that you have a lot of militia available for the USSR. They have an once a game ability that lets them build militia for 1 IPP, which can let you drop a veritable butt-tonne of them in one turn.
I use yellow learning/counting chips i got from amazon to make my militia affordable too.
I feel like the RAI (Rules as Intended) in this case is that if Vichy is taken, they surrender before alignment happens.
@hbg-gw-enthusiast You are correct. They eretta’d the target selection on subs.
@sjelso It can not. There isnt really any impression that it could?
@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in The FAQ Thread:
Sea Zone 25 and Coastal Artillery at Narrow Crossings
Also if there is coastal artillery on the two crossings in the English channel, can its port (which sits between them) be blockaded?
If a submarine …
IMO 0.5 states that when a submarine submerges during a combat movement, it can not participate in a combat until the next combat movement phase. This means it can not block or unsurface in the non-combat phase.
My questions that have been floating about my mind:
@didier_de_dax said in Katyusha:
Or, does that mean that the USSR are limited to build only 2 katyusha per turn (when the advanced artillery technology has been researched) ?
This is the correct interpretation.
@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in Lightning War Question:
Question 2: If you are using optional rule 10.2, then yes.
Doesnt there need to be an airbase there?
Italy can chose the declare war on the the UK after they move through the canal
After they non-combat move through the canal correct? Italy cant make a combat move through the suez against the UK before declaring war.
Also if they non-combat move into a SZ with a British fleet, they don’t then fight combat, they share sea zones as per .7
Ok this is starting to make sense to me now.
I have one last stickler, though. If the British fleet is in SZ 82, and you have to declare your intent when before entering a zone, doesn’t that mean, the italians cant attack the fleet in SZ82. The moment they are entering 82 from 81, they declare their intent and the Suez closes?
@gen-manstein Because you could “Stun Lock” planes from moving away from a land zone by bombing their airfields. And if you want to get realistic, its easy for a plane to take off, the hard part is landing it in one piece.
@captainnapalm One example would be north australia. Depending on where you measure it from, an amphibious assault cosses mountains or it does not.
Im not sure if there are any others.
I think while it would be kinda cool to have differing values for different nations tanks, adding the rules to each adds too much complexity and stuff to balance/
At best what you would want to go for maybe one specific special rule to each nation’s armour unit, if that’s what you wanted to do.
Can the USSR Scorched Earth canals?
According to the FAQ:
Q: What are “facilities” ?
A: All man-made structures. See 1.4: “Land zones may have various man-made structures in them referred to henceforth as facilities.”
Canals are man made structures, ergo rules say they can be destroyed? I dont think this is intended, after all the USSR shouldn’t be able to take the Suez or Panama Canals and be able to fully destroy them in a couple turns, right?
I however find the idea of doing so hilarious.
Edit: The FAQ should be updated from “any man-made structures” to “any player made structures” or something like that.
@chris_henry said in Italy at War & North Africa/Mediterranean at War "Expansion" Ideas:
I’m having a harder time grasping a small unit like this being able to destroy a whole in-game ship. Just realizing how many ships a destroyer or cruiser represents in the game makes me balk a bit. But on the flip side, the cost of this unit being 4 IPP and having a maximum of 1 on the board makes me think it’s also a bit of a cost for the Italians as well to buy it!
You may also wish to portray it as if it scores a hit the ship is damaged. Capital Ships with 2 hp are damaged as normal, otherwise the unit is crippled (Reduced to 2 movement, -2 to attack and defence). Can be repaired as normal.
I think if you wanted to buff strategic bombers you could allow them to target multiple facilities in a turn. IE instead of 2d6 at one target, it could choose to do 1d3/6 to two targets.
@jon-b said in Escort ships:
If i recall correctly, Yes and Yes.