@Ragnell804 gg, I concede
Kobu vs. Project Ozma G1940 No Tech
-
Let me know where you want those hits.
-
Crap, I forgot what I was doing with my buy. If it’s okay I was supposed to buy an airbase instead.
-
Eh, I guess it hardly matters. I’ll just keep it. Killing those transports for free will just be a little extra salt in Italy’s wounds.
-
Both destroyers, 1 on carrier, 1 cruiser.
Sorry for the delay, real life and stuff. You can change your buy if you want, or keep it. It’s a friendly game. :-D
-
No worries on the delays. I lose 2 ftrs and a tac. We press on.
Rolls: 2@4 2@3; Total Hits: 22@4: (6, 2)2@3: (2, 5)Rolls: 2@4 1@3 1@2; Total Hits: 22@4: (3, 4)1@3: (4)1@2: (3) -
Phooey. Have to ask you again here. Keep planes?
-
Yeah, I will keep the planes. I can always buy another carrier right where that one blew up and I want to shoot down as many of you’s as I can.
-
I keep a fighter and the bomber. In for a penny…
Rolls: 1@4 1@3; Total Hits: 11@4: (5)1@3: (2)Rolls: 2@4; Total Hits: 12@4: (2, 6) -
Once more for great justice.
Rolls: 1@4; Total Hits: 11@4: (3)Rolls: 1@4; Total Hits: 11@4: (4) -
What a freaking disaster. Over those two turns I should have had the majority of my planes left. That may have cost me the game right there.
Collect 56 again.
-
Can’t disagree with you there. Fortune was forgiving towards my aggressive placements. Mutual annihilation was better than I could have hoped for.
Russia 3:
We declare a peacekeeping action in China… though surely the bellicose government of Japan will consider this a declaration of war. I have adjusted your IPC total on the board.
Buys: 6 armor, spend 36.
Manchuria is liberated in combat moves.
Collect 37 + 1 saved (+1 from same purchase order last turn that I marked on the board, total 39)
-
Actually I have one addition since it kept eating my NCMs. Fortunately you have not moved yet, so I will post the update. My sub is supposed to be with the battleship in z113.
-
Japan buys
3 ftr = 30
11 inf = 33Spend 63.
Suiyuyan
Rolls: 4@4 2@3 5@1; Total Hits: 64@4: (4, 6, 3, 1)2@3: (2, 2)5@1: (6, 6, 1, 5, 3)Rolls: 1@4 3@2; Total Hits: 21@4: (4)3@2: (3, 5, 2)Kweichow
Rolls: 1@4 1@3 4@2 1@1; Total Hits: 21@4: (6)1@3: (2)4@2: (6, 3, 3, 1)1@1: (4)Rolls: 2@2; Total Hits: 02@2: (6, 6)India
AA guns
ftr
Rolls: 4@1; Total Hits: 04@1: (5, 2, 6, 6)tac
Rolls: 4@1; Total Hits: 14@1: (2, 4, 1, 5)Java
Rolls: 1@4 1@3 2@2; Total Hits: 11@4: (3)1@3: (4)2@2: (6, 4)Rolls: 2@2; Total Hits: 02@2: (6, 5) -
India
Rolls: 3@4 4@3 4@2 2@1; Total Hits: 63@4: (3, 1, 5)4@3: (1, 1, 3, 6)4@2: (3, 4, 3, 5)2@1: (1, 5)Rolls: 8@2; Total Hits: 48@2: (3, 1, 4, 4, 5, 2, 1, 2)Java
Rolls: 1@4 1@3 2@2; Total Hits: 31@4: (1)1@3: (3)2@2: (6, 2)Rolls: 1@2; Total Hits: 11@2: (2) -
India lose a ftr
Rolls: 3@4 3@3 3@2; Total Hits: 43@4: (4, 3, 1)3@3: (6, 1, 6)3@2: (4, 5, 6)Rolls: 2@2; Total Hits: 12@2: (3, 1) -
Japan collects 56 + 10 NO - 11 convoy + 10 from India = 65.
-
OK, the US move has got me with a rules clarification.
I am planning to invade Korea using 1 transport, and use planes to cover against the scramble. The rest of the fleet will move out of z6.
The Pacific 1940 FAQ says that you may move units into an unoccupied sea zone on the principle that “the possibility that there could be combat is enough to allow the move.”
I have to assume that the same principle of “the possibility of combat” would allow me to use the rule which allows non-combat moves in the combat move phase to escape a hostile sea zone.
I wanted to verify that you do not have any strenuous objection to this.
-
Yeah, I think it should be treated as hostile so you can move away if not participating. Let me know if you will be triggering any kamikaze strikes with ship attacks anywhere.
-
I stand corrected. Official ruling is that they may not move away which means they would participate in the battle. Good for me and my kamikaze, bad for you.
-
Kreighund answered here: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4280&p=39513
Suggested Topics
