Rules question

You roll one die for each plane as it enters the area. Loses are determined by the aggressor and are taken immediately. You can resolve attacks in any order.

If a fighter and a bomber fly over an AA gun to the same battle, you use two dice and the attacker chooses what he loses. If they are doing separate attacks, roll them that way.

This is how you should figure it:

1. Declare all attacks including flight plans.
2. Choose one attack, a regular battle or a SBR.
3. Roll one die for each plane that flies over an AA gun in each territory.

Say you are making a SBR on Karelia and also attacking Russia with two fighters that fly over Karelia. Choose the SBR first (I seem to remember the rules saying do these first anyway), so roll 1 die for the bomber. Then do the Russia attack. Roll two dice for flying over Karelia, then a die for each that survives to attack Russia. On the way home during non-combat, AA guns don’t fire.

I think that’s how it’s done based on what I know from SBRs. I’ve been proven wrong by official clarifications recently, so take it with a grain of salt. It’s just how I’ve always done it.

THat´s my understanging of the AA rules as well.

Since WHEN??!??

The defender has always determined what the defender loses and the attacker has always determined what the attacker loses in every game and every situation I have ever played or observed. Do I live in a different universe?!?

@El:

Do I live in a different universe?!?

Yes? :-?

What were you replying to?

Were there more planes joined in those attacks? Can you give a specific example?

With Karelia and Russia again, if you sent one bomber to attack Russia flying over Karelia and two fighters to Karelia, then it should roll those two attacks separately. In that case, it would just tell you what you lost since the fighters and bomber are separate. If on the other hand, two fighters and a bomber are attacking the same territory and it isn’t letting you choose which to lose, then it is incorrect.

Jefe: How is this different from the rules you play with? No one is arguing against the defender choosing his own losses and the attacker choosing his own losses.

@morten200:

Jefe: How is this different from the rules you play with? No one is arguing against the defender choosing his own losses and the attacker choosing his own losses.

Sometimes I think he reads every other line of the post he is questioning. :wink: