Illegal/legal moves

@Kreuzfeld:

CVs are good. However, the reason DDs are bad, isn’t that it is a “bad” combatship if you plan on attacking. It is just that the TTs really are good combatships in the game. You will  usually have enough heavy ships surviving the first turn. Those ships combined with TTs will be enough to stop the luftwaffe. The TTs really are great combatships in this game. (seriously)

I understand that TTs are the best ship economy-wise, but I believe that a CV may be an extremely cost-efficient buy for the first turn only (because you have the two FTRs in UK that can land on the carrier no problem).  Later in the game the CV would become extremely cost-inefficient, of course (you’re paying 16 for a 1 HP 3 DEF when you could be spending that same 16 IPC for 2 HP of 1 DEF that can also transport units).

@Kreuzfeld:

I usually land in africa until my pacific fleet makes it to the atlantic. then I split and send uk into norway and start landing in the americans in europe the round after that.

Do you advocate sending the Indian Fleet south?  What do you do about the TT in SZ59?  When I used to play Revised/42/42SE I always remember going out of my way to eliminate it (as forcing Japan to buy more TTs is a good way to buy the allies precious time).

Welcome, MidSpeck!

@MidSpeck:

Since I resolved Sea Battle A first, and already declared my intention to move my third carrier there, does that mean I cannot change my mind and move it to the Sea Battle B zone?  Because I’d much rather catch 2 of my fighters than 1 of them.  Or am I committed because of the order in which I chose to resolve the battles?

You are committed because of the order in which you chose to resolve the battles.

@MidSpeck:

So the question here is, must I try and catch the MOST planes, or move carriers to at least catch 1 plane each?

The carrier must move to allow some fighters to land, but it’s your choice as to which one(s).

If you like playing with NAs and picking them to suit your strategy, give Axis and Allies Revised Enhanced (commonly abbreviated as AARe) a try. It uses National Advantages as an important part of core play, not just an optional rule. They’re considered well-balanced after several years of development and play-testing.

It appears I can’t post links, but you’ll find the sticky in the House Rules section on this forum.

Have fun.

@Kaine:

Can england use its transports to move out of the hostile zone, pick up troops, and then move back in to the hostile zone (and then conduct an amphibious assault as normal if the subs are defeated) or must the transports, if they retreat, end up in a friendly sea zone?

Yes, this is legal, as long as the sea zone in which the transports are loading units is friendly.

@Kaine:

Further (and related) are there ANY restrictions on movement caused by starting in a hostile zone rather than a friendly?

The movement must be done in the Combat Movement phase.  It must follow all of the rules for Combat Movement, except that it need not end in combat.

Gencon takes place in Indianapolis IN, from 8/16-8/19.

Several board game and minis tournaments…

Still time to plan and go…

Without reinforcement, WEU falls to the Allies on Turn 2, and barring a re-direction of those massed ARM that HAD been going to Moscow being turned around and heading for Paris instead, the Allis will KEEP WEU for the remainder of the game.

Actually, this was teh thread that started teh whole thing that led to LHTR 1.3.  It was about using friendly ships that were already in an enemy occupied sea zone as fodder for your attack on those enemy ships.

Under the new LHTR that came out of this, the Allies can NOT use those US ships that are already in SZ59 as fodder for a UK attack on the Japan ships in SZ59.

This became the “Multinational Forces on Attack” thread.

I vote for tokyo express + bombardment. The sub combo is nice but Germany has very little need for subs because he has to prosecute a land war against Russia as well, so the interdiction would be better if you want to play the economic shutdown with subs, but interdiction doesn’t really combine well with super subs since the subs you’re building aren’t necessarily attacking anything (in fact they’re probably getting hunted by planes).

Tokyo express and bombardment turns destroyers into a hybrid transport/battleship, which I think it very helpful for prosecuting island wars and such. For the price of one battleship you can get 2 bomabrdments with 2 destroyers, and they can carry 1 inf apiece too! That would be great to take back islands or invade US with all those bomardments and you could easily reinforce manchuria and the like.

Bombers are ok but still they’re expensive and you need to build stuff to shield them with as US; all you’re doing with heavy bombers is nearly guaranteeing a hit per bomber and/or getting high IPC damage rolls. Although this possibly could be very strong against germany if you land bombers in UK, getting the max 10 out of his territory every turn.