See other thread about Russia strategy… overall I can just say: DO NOT PLAY WITH NAs. In my opinion they are very unbalanced and can shift the game into certain directions very much. Just as examples: Lend-Lease for Russia is a lot stronger than e.g. Trans-Siberian railway; Luftwaffe Dive Bombers are strong; Joint strike or Colonial Garrison are sick; same are Superfortresses which are just stupid especially with heavy bombers.
2 quick questions please
-
1. can a fighter attack a sub in open sea?
2. I know a battleship or destroyer can be part of an amphibious attack, but say western europe was lost by germany and UK took it over, later Germany moves tanks in to take it back. If UK has a battleship sitting off the coast of W. Europe, can that defend the land or is that only part of a naval or amphibious assault??the navy part of this game always confuses me. open sea battles is self-explanatory, but if a ship is sitting off land somwhere, can it be part of attack or defense if the battle is all land units fighting??
-
1. Yes. However, after 1 round of combat, the SUB can choose to submerge if it is still alive, ending the attack by the FIG (or BOM).
2. NO. The Battleship is offshore. It can only engage in land combat for a single shot and only in the very special case of an amphibious landing. In the example you cite, with Germany counter-attacking Western, the Allied BB is in SZ7, and means NOTHING to the Allied defenders in Western. Battleships are naval units, and are ignored for land combat except in the case where the Battleship is in the same sea zone as the attacker’s transport(s) that are offloading to combat.
Also, DSTs (Destroyers) can only engage in land combat if you have the technology that permits them to fire a support shot like a Battleship. Otherwise DSTs mean NOTHING in land combat.