The Irish Sea

@rforelli
From the “Air Base”-unit characteristics, Rulebook Pacific 1940.2, page 25:

Increased Air Unit Range: When taking off from a friendly territory that has an operative air base, air units gain 1 additional point of movement range. At that point fighters and tactical bombers can move 5 spaces, and strategic bombers can move 7spaces. Note: Air units on carriers in a sea zone adjacent to a territory containing an air base don’t benefit from this additional movement range.

I saw that pocket square early on, but the problem with it is that you may still need every guy on London to make sure its safe, even 1 mech.  Sometimes I cant even attack Scotland, if they stacked it, because you cant take Scotland and still ensure they can’t destroy London…that’s where SL gets tricky.

To call Ireland Pro-Allied, that’s the historical inaccuracy…

This plan doesn’t ignore Japan, that’s a compete foolish move in my opinion. I just build bombers enough to keep Germany annoyed while maintaining a Pacific Fleet. As I said before, I build a 1:1 build against Japan and make sure Hawaii doesn’t get captured.

Thanks for the responses guys. Much appreciated.

One thing the Germans can do is hit the UK Cruiser in SZ91 which I used to do but stopped because those two subs are better used hitting SZ110 and therefore preserving more of the Luftwaffe.

Taranto is a pretty much all or nothing option for the UK but assuming it happens and succeeds the UK fleet is generally toast anyway. Is it really worth going to much length to stop?

@Vance:

or take carolines.

Right, that’s the best place to stage the USN . . . but there’s already a naval base there silly.  :wink:

As Japan I like to stage the IJN off of phil, put a blocker to prevent Korea/Japan invasion, and stack the carolines with as many ftr/tac as I need or can spare. Usually US doesn’t have more then 1-2 transports, so it should be safe from an amphib assault with 3-4+ air there.  Keep the mainland air on kwansi/FIC to land on carriers and you’re set up for a very heavy counter to any US moves in that direction.

I don’t like to trade ships with US when I can help it and if I have to fight a naval battle I’d rather be set up to hit him as hard as I can with the strength of my powerful airforce. Most of the times the threat is enough and the USN stays away.

@Zallomallo:

In the meantime the Soviets will be unstoppable.

Unless they go 100% China ;)

@marechallannes:

Q1: A battleship enters a seazone with a hostile submarine. The sub submerges.

Following the rules, the sub emerges after the combat (that doesn’t take place)

Who controlls the seazone after the battleship owners turn?

Is the sub able to raid the convoy zone in that seazone, or is it impossible, cause the battleship owner “won” the battle and controls the sea zone?

Q2: Does the sub emerges before the collect income phase of the battleship owner and is it able to raid the sea-zone of the battleship-owner?

Q3: A submarine enters a seazone with a hostile submarine. Both sub submerges before any round of combat.

Are both submarines are able to make convoy raids? (For example a UK-sub and a Jap-sub in SZ 37)

1:  No power can “control” a seazone.  That’s why you don’t mark it.  The sub is able to raid, because it remains in the seazone during the collect income phase.  Powers occupy a seazone, and a seazone can be hostile, but it’s never really “controlled”.  A power can still place units in a seazone adjacent to its factory, regardless of how many enemy units might remain in that seazone (that may even be disrupting a convoy).
2:  Yes.
3: Yes,  assuming each is present during their respective enemy’s collect income phase (when the disruption occurs).

“Submerging” is simply a term for the option to retreat but remain in the same seazone.  It serves no other function, and it does not have any impact on any other phases of a turn.  After combat, all subs are effectively no longer submerged.