Order of defending fire

laststrike, yes, you can move units into a territory, the rule specifically says so. It does NOT say you can move through it and gives not examples where this occurs. You can argue one side and say “Since it doesn’t say you can’t, you can” on the other side you can say “They give a specific ruling that you can move into a territory but don’t go on to say you can move through it. If they intended you to do so, they would say so”. I’m living with being able to move through it for now.

All gravy, the rule book clearly states that you resolve all combat for the '1’s, the defender takes the units off and puts them behind the casuality line, then the attacker rolls the '2’s and the defender moves the hits below the casuality line. The links clearly show this to be true as well. It was news to me but them’s the rules. On page 19, middle column, section 4). “Each time a hit is scored, the defender chooses one of his or her units as a casuality and moves it below the casuality line…”. I’m convinced, the links to 'official A&A" sites accept it, you should too. It sucks to be wrong but better corrected then adhering to false beliefts.

BB
BB

Look up the word “resolve”. the IAAPA is wrong, as is the AAMC. I wrote a long retort, including definitions and clearly stated disparity of the rules. I was told that I had an “invalid session”. I do not have another half-hour to restate my viewpoints at this time, perhaps another.

**Resolve as defined in the Webster’s New World Dictionary:

1. to break up into separate parts; analyze
2. to change: used reflexively
3. to reach as a decision; determine
4. to solve (a problem)
5. to decide by vote

I’m thinking 5) voting on the outcome is out, 4) since it is not a crossword puzzle that’s out 2) to change, yeah, I’d like to change some battles, toss a few more infantry in here and there, but I think we can all agree #2 is out. I’m thinking #3 is our baby, no doubt All gravy will eventually come to the conclusion you determine the outcome of rolling the #1s on the attack sheet is what is meant.

So, you resolve the 1s first and allocate hits, then you resolve the 2s and allocate hits etc.

All Gravy, you can conclude the entire world is wrong and only you are right, and you might even be correct. And, 1 Infantry could defeat 50 attacking armour with 50 bombers in support too. I won’t hold my breath on either. :-)

BB**

All Gravy, for what it’s worth I agree with you 100%. Rules for almost every game are amiguous and as a player you have to try and determine what you think they MEANT, not what they actually wrote. If the rest of the world is wrong I don’t mind being one of the few lonely right ones.

“The Path of the righteous man is beset on all sides, by the inequities of the selfish, and the tyranny of evil men.”

Exactly what part is ambiguous or open to intrepretation?

BB

@BigBlocky:

…5) to decide by vote

I’m thinking 5) voting on the outcome is out…

:)… But even then, voting wouldn’t change much in letting the allies win most of the games ;). Still like that idea: Your inf is dead by 3:2 votes.

Yeah, ain’t democracy great! 8)

We oftne resolve this – as do “official” and unofficial computerized versions of the game – by using one of two minor modifications.

1. The subs always fire first, and the sub hits therefore count first (on every round of combat during the turn).

– or –

2. Sub hits always hit ships if there are ships to hit.

Personally, I just use the second, common sense rule. A sub isn’t going to shoot at a fighter that it can’t hit in the first place. No one I’ve played against has had a complaint about it. Some game engines I’ve used require this rule, including the Hasbro Interactive one. This rule works whether you resolve hits a column at a time or all at once, too.