Thanks again GHG! Yeah, I was thinking that was right too. It was just shocking because I had never really considered the option of choosing a plane over an infantry.

I’d snuck in and took an undefended Hawaii, so he wanted it back asap, but hadn’t been building land forces in the Western USA yet, so only had one infantry as an option.

Glad to hear you affirm my thoughts there!

Thanks GHG! Good to know I was wrong there. I took it to mean that they weren’t eligible, but that did seem unfair to the defending player.

Another clarification here that I had yet to come across. My German fleet attacked a Russian fleet. No planes were involved, and Russia had, I believe, 3 subs.

Rules state that subs can only be seen by planes in this game (unlike in A&A where it’s destroyers). Because I had no planes present, the rules read to me that the Russian subs could not partake in the battle.

Is this accurate?

A follow up, what if the Russian player wanted his subs in the fight? Is he just SOL there, and they have to submerge? Or does he somehow get the option to choose to have them defend if he wanted?

Thanks again!

Chris

So, maybe a dumb question, but this came up last weekend and I’ve never considered this before.

My brother attacked one of my islands, I had two infantry defending, he attacked with one infantry (all he had close enough), and planes from aircraft carriers.

I scored a hit. Because he wanted to take the island badly enough, he decided he wanted to take one of his planes as a casualty instead of his lone infantry.

I guess my question has a couple parts.

1. Is that even possible? I couldn’t find somewhere that said he was required necessarily to take land units as casualties first. There’s the rule where amphibiously assaulting units need to be taken as casualties in a battle first before non-amphibiously assaulting units, but I don’t read that to really apply to this situation with planes.

2. Because he decided to take planes as a casualty, does the double-casualty rule come into effect here? We decided in game that no, it wouldn’t, and only had him lose one plane, and not two. That seemed unfair, though is also I suppose his prerogative.

Let me know if you have thoughts on this. I was really puzzled by this one, and didn’t really have an answer at all here!

Thanks,

Chris

Ahhh thanks for this GHG. I’d always thought the rule meant that the Spanish Civil War kept playing out once the Germans and USSR were at war, but that once the war ended, the winning side would be automatically aligned.

Interesting, that definitely changes things in my thinking of the game! It probably behooves the Axis to keep the war going for as long as possible to have them automatically join later. Though the flip side is no victory points for winning the SCW.

Thanks for clarifying there!

Thanks @GeneralHandGrenade, that’s how I was reading it ultimately too! It just seemed worded funny to me for some reason.

I agree with you though, sending a unit seem very risky indeed, especially if sending 1 IPP gives you the same modifier anyways!

Hey all!

So, just looking at the Turkey at War rules again. Had a question.

The Influence Modifiers Table 1-1 lists the different ways to modify influence (obviously). Are those modifiers for "modifying the die roll for influence? Or does doing any of those things just count as an influence point?

To me, the table name being “Influence Modifier” is no different than the convoy raiding modifier meaning. For example, if I lend lease a unit to Turkey, and then roll a “4” for my influence roll, does that +1 for the lend lease make my roll a “3”, thus gaining an influence point?

Or, as asked earlier, does lend leasing a unit just automatically gain an influence point for you?

I guess it’s that word “modifier” that’s throwing me off.

Thanks!

Chris

I’m in the same boat, SS Gen. Would like to see when V3 comes out and decide then, but I’m sure I’d be willing to part with it at that point. Again, if that’s not too long a wait.

@GeneralHandGrenade thanks! Yeah, that makes sense. Was just curious that they weren’t just adding all the units from the expansions.

I remember the SPA rules from the Afrika Korps expansion, that’ll be a fantastic piece to have, and will add serious punch to blitzing forces!

That’s a great Gurkha rule too!

Looking forward to it! Was hesitant to spend more money on yet another map, but I really do like the terrain feature upgrades to this one. Also fear the version 2 game will fall to the wayside, and miss out on the serious rule book flaws that this one will hopefully fix!

@cdatkins74 exactly!

That thread I mentioned goes into a bit more detail. While that seems like a solid plan for Italy on the surface, you of course end up freeing up however many Allied units/IPP’s to concentrate their efforts elsewhere on the map. Yeah, you can’t just leave the Med/Italy without a force in the area to check them, but an Allied player won’t have to spend so much there keeping them in check either! Some give and take there, but I suppose is something viable one could try sometime!