If you’re going to use the US as your trading country, then make sure you have a good transport system in place. Get a 4x4 going on. Four transports from Ecan to UK, and UK to EEU (preferably) or Kar. And buy a fighter EVERY round so you can fly it to Russia. Do the same with the UK. Buy a fighter every round and fly it to Russia. Get a good fighter cover going, have Russia buy infantry out the wazoo (and an armour every now and then) and continually wear Germany down.
Multi-National forces on ATTACK
-
usa hits german subs with only air and uk boats are there, germany gets to pound those ships?
Nope. If US is attacking it is USA v Germany and UK is totally out of play.
I waded through much of the AA Pacific rules where this issue is treated differently (the UK ships WOULD be in play). As an interesting side note, the example given involved the UK having a destroyer in the Japan Seazone. Japan then built a sub, which the US air then elected to attack. In AAP a friendly destroyer MUST be present for any air unit to attack a sub. The UK destroyer is considered to be “present” in order to allow the US air units to even try to hit the sub. Since it has an actual value to the US, there is at least some logic to making it an eligible return fire target for the defending submarines. (None of this is applicable to Axis and Allies Revised - LHTR rules).
BW
-
Hurry up and pass the bill through Congress to LHTR so we can get off of this horse :lol:
-
AAP is much smaller scale as well. i posted the comment about the subs to illustrate my point against having allies soak hits. i doubt if any uk player would want usa to hit u-boats when it could cost them their bb!
-
Some of these discussions remind me of debates between Star Wars fans about what’s canon and what’s not. Seems to me we’ve sorta got one of those problems on our hands. What rule is “the” rule? :-P
-
Well, I originally thought the way Octo and others do.
Then I changed my mind when I read Larry’s previous posts.
Then this whole thing exploded.
And, in an effort to get the best and most correct ruling and clarification, I argued to the best of my ability to illustrate the less popular side in this issue.
LHTR is apparently going to be updated (1.3 I think?) in the near future, and a specific exclusion for naval forces belonging to an ally of an attacker are going to be included.
-
i understand both sides and their validity and i conjecture that with lhtr 3 that allied boats will soak hits. my biggest issue is that it seems to be ANOTHER, albeit rare, situation that favors the allies in a game that most agree already favors the allies (even without NA’s which make it worse) i would much rather see something that makes KJF viable
-
Actually Crit, the correction they are writing will specifically exclude the UK ships from ANY involvement in a situation like the US attacking a German sub in waters that also contain UK ships.
UK BB’s won;t be able to absorb a hit, but an air only attack will leave the German sub with nothing to attack despite all those juicy UK ships being there too.
-
so he/they are CHANGING their stand!?!
democracy in action :mrgreen:
-
so he/they are CHANGING their stand!?!
democracy in action :mrgreen:
Appreantly, Larry is changing his to fit with everyone else :-)
-
so, ncscswitch (or anybody else?),
has there been a modification in Larry’s rules?
or will he change them eventually in one way or another?
when is it official?
:-) -
Well, the ruling from the folks who actually authored the written LHTR (the 3 existing versions) are of a mind that the UK ships absorbing hits was NEVER legal under the rules (this is at odds with Larry’s own posts on the subject previously).
However, Larry has apparently withdrawn his objection and the CLARIFICATION that will include a blackletter exclusion of what they felt was already in the rules will be posted shortly.
I have no idea what the distribution is for LHRT revisions, or even what makes them “official” Afterall, LHRT are TECHNICALLY just house rules that a lot of folks use. And since there are currently 3 versions (LHRT, LHRT1.1, LHRT 1.2) and about to be a 4th (LHRT 1.3) plus the original rule manual AND the original manual with errata revisions both from Avalon…
So you tell me, with 5 “official” rule sets in existence, what does it take to make the next set “official”?
-
@ncscswitch:
So you tell me, with 5 “official” rule sets in existence, what does it take to make the next set “official”?
LOL,
when a Axis and Allies Revised Revised is sold in shops in 2014?
:lol: 8-) -
@ncscswitch:
Well, the ruling from the folks who actually authored the written LHTR (the 3 existing versions) are of a mind that the UK ships absorbing hits was NEVER legal under the rules (this is at odds with Larry’s own posts on the subject previously).
However, Larry has apparently withdrawn his objection and the CLARIFICATION that will include a blackletter exclusion of what they felt was already in the rules will be posted shortly.
I have no idea what the distribution is for LHRT revisions, or even what makes them "official" Afterall, LHRT are TECHNICALLY just house rules that a lot of folks use. And since there are currently 3 versions (LHRT, LHRT1.1, LHRT 1.2) and about to be a 4th (LHRT 1.3) plus the original rule manual AND the original manual with errata revisions both from Avalon…
So you tell me, with 5 “official” rule sets in existence, what does it take to make the next set “official”?
LHTR v 1.2 is the current “official” rule set in use by the major on-line clubs and by the moderators/gamemasters of the major face to face tournaments. If and when the update under discussion is put into effect, it will likely be issued as LHT 1.3. It will be available on-line as a web document at http://dicey.net/revised/index.php . A link will also be provided there for a pdf version (English first, with German following in a month or so, if history repeats itself.). The German online club DAAK, maintains the site where the pdf versions are kept. AAMC maintains the site where the web version is kept.
What makes them official is the recognition by the clubs’ leadership that they are the rules in effect for club play. If your local club has printed variation rule sets, then those are the official rules for your local group. Their “officialness” is only a question of degree of universal acceptance. I would be delighted to have AH/WOC lift the LHTR rule set in its entirety and post in on its website, but frankly Scarlett, I don’t think they give a damn. They’re making money with no effort and do not seem to be concerned that they have a defective product on the market.
BW
-
Thanks Black Watch :-)
The short version is that there is in fact NO single, 100% universal set of rules that everyone agrees on as being official :-D
-
@ncscswitch:
Thanks Black Watch :-)
The short version is that there is in fact NO single, 100% universal set of rules that everyone agrees on as being official :-D
Agreed. However it might be useful for anyone wanting to play competitively in the online clubs or at ftf tourneys to print and learn the LHTR rules - it’s what you’ll be playing with there, and you don’t really want to learn them in your first experience in the clubs.
Also - the same notion of non-universality of rules can be seen in other situations, but you better be sure you learn the local rules before entering the game. To use traffic rules for example:
- In Quebec (at least the last time I drove there), there is no right turn on a red light allowed. If you do it and are caught, it’s the same fine as if you ran straight through.
- In Ontario, those fancy dressed up pedestrian crosswalks absolutely require any driver to yield the right of way to pedestrians - it’s not optional.
BW
-
I agree with Switch on this one, i wont put on many arguments as I think Switch has made it very clear, at least I see his point very clear.
Some says that this shouldn’t apply because the game tends to favor the allies, but balance in the game shouldn’t be made up of battle rules, it should be made out of starting units and income, besides the problem with balance is already solved with bids.But consider this, what if you bring a UK carrier with two US planes into a battle on the UK turn.
Would you not say that these planes are very much in the zone of fire, and thereby legal targets for defending fire?By the way, by bringing fighters on a UK carrier would allow fighters to move up to 6 spaces in one turn, so now we’re into a lot of rule bending… :|
EDIT: I just remembered something about treating allied fighters on carriers as cargo on a tranny, so forget my argument, I’m just tired and talking silly. I still place my vote on MR L and switch though.
Regards,
-Daniel Malus -
As far as I can tell, The rules out of the box work just fine for me. I know that they are poorly witten but hey we can’t all be perfect. Also I have no problem winning with the Axis without a bid so I’m not to sure what is out of balance here. The allies have to work together and the axis has to find a way to keep that from happining.
-
Glad to be of assistance Craig.
And glad that the rule received serious review before implementation :-)
Also, glad to know that other folks realized it was a significant enough problem that it needed to be addressed.
-
Thank you for the update Craig.
I just referenced the new 1.3 version in answer to a question in our Tournament (new the result, if not the specific language)
Thank you!
Suggested Topics
