I dont have a drop down arrow next to the underline on wordpad. How do I underline with different styles,i.e. a skwiggly line?

Thanks.

Or do i have to move either all of them out, or either initiate combat with all of them against the enemy sea units? Also a  question related to this: A uk sub starts its turn with a japanese battleship in a sz. Can the sub just submerge and not fight since there are no enemy destroyers, or does it have to follow 1 of the options in the rule book in the section under ‘Sea Units Starting in Hostile Sea Zones’?

Thank you panther, its all cleared up now.

The rule book says transports can ignore enemy subs and offload if at least one warship to the attacking power is present. What if the warship is a destroyer, would that cancel the submersible ability of the subs and therefore the destroyer has to fight them?, or can the destroyer ignore them as well along with the other warships? And also, for example, a us battleship and transport are doing an amph. assault on seazone where there is one german destroyer and sub. Can the us player fight the destroyer and ignore the sub and let the transport offload; or does the defender choose whether he wants the sub to participate in combat or not in this case?

Can subs move into hostile sea zones on noncombat that contain enemy destroyers? and subs are only sea units that can move into hostile sz on noncombat, if they have not moved in combat?

Maybe this was asked somewhere already, but im just to lazy to find it. For example, the us player on noncombat move does a “naval blockade” moves his warships(no destroyers) into empty sea zones surrounding japan.On next round, The japan player builds subs and cruisers and puts them in szs with the us ships. The us player on his turn, decides to fight japans ships. Question is: can the us player  ignore japans subs? And if he can, would having a us destroyer change that?

Yes i agree. Ive played this game on triple a as the axis vs allies on easy AI, and it took me awhile to subdue usa (the only allied power left). I eventually did, just for the fun of it, (i think around turn47)(probably never going to do that again!) :-D But it took a painstakingly annoying lot of time and build up, even though axis controlled almost everithing. The japanese built a factory in brazil and just kept bombing the us, while germany built up ,took eastern canada, built a factory there, and eventually took Washington. With 63 fighters , 27tanks and 21 infantry, and 12 bombers. Then planes flew to canada, and a german tank took West usa and west canada on next turn by blitzing. The one thing i dont like about playing this game against AI,(i dont know about other ones yet, havent tried playing them), i had to built up a HUGE force as germany cuz i wanted to be sure to take usa. Because it seems like to me the computer is trying to “hack” almost every single roll for his favor when he ends up in a predicament :-), and i end up losing battles as the axis that i should have won guaranteed, were it a normal table board game. Having the computer roll for you, and rolling dice yourself is not the same thing :-D

I am thinking a different strategy kusaf for the axis, istead of japan going for calcutta most of the time, and germany for Moscow, Leningrad and London in most games i played.Sometimes if japan already has calcutta, germany just goes easy way obliterates the soviets and takes moscow and leningrad, (3 victory cities) and axis win. Has anyone ever tried kusaf and how did it workout for you? (thinking KUSAF strategy mostly because axis go easy, like I said, never attempt to conquer usa, and its “almost” impossible even with a not very experienced usa player.) :-D

So a sub can suprise strike, submerge, then other sea units fire, then defending units fire (excluding submarines), then remove casualties, then press attack, then same sub suprise strikes and submerges, then attacking sea units fire… and so on until defeat or retreat of attacker?