In the 2nd edition rules you must own both land territories to pass thru the suez canal. There really should be a tiny line on your map. This is not an optional rule. Land units may of course move across the canal without transports. This is do to the size of the canal and actually follows the real thing. The canal is very tiny even today, so it was imperative in world war 2 to hold both sides for safe passage. If the axis owns one side and the allirs the other, no one goes thru. And movement thru is considered one movement point.
Welcome to the forum, Swantalon!
What are you referring to?
This is the Anniversary Edition subforum. 🙂
Larry has stated many times that the units don’t generally fit standard military models for classic formations (divisions, corps, army) and in some cases these are corps and others they are armies. They are not the same in every case, allowing for the corps in Africa to be symbolized as perhaps 2-3 units, while in the Soviet union one infantry may represent an army ( 3-5 corps).
Yes, IL thanks,
I have been reading those old posts. I note he (Larry Harris) stated the Naval units abstraction was a greater dilution of unit strength, or a direct correlation to vessel numbers from standard representation of Classic fleet/squadron/Battle groups. I am thinking more in chess terms, where tempo or position is sometimes of more value then individual pieces.