If Japan has 5 inf. in Pekin and there are 3 partisans there also, when japan attacks those partisans do they get a -1 while the partisans get a +1 for the city bonus/penalty? Were playing Saturday and would like to get this clarified. Thank You.
Klaykowalski
@Klaykowalski
Posts made by Klaykowalski
-
RE: Partisan Expansion
-
RE: Partisan Expansion
Just seems like my opponents are taking the rules too far. They’re making it very hard to kill them and allowing them to take IPPs way beyond what seems fair.
-
Partisan Expansion
Hi guys a couple of questions regarding partisan expansion. First one, when partisans do the disrupt IPP’s option is it unlimited, or are they limited to disrupting the value of IPP’s that the land square is? Secondly, when it comes to killing them and you are playing with all the land defensive bonuses do they receive the bonus? And in order to attack them can I move land units in to attack them (say and amphibious assault)or do I have to have land units in the square at the beginning of turn to attack them?
-
Peace time economy
We are having some confusion with counting up USA’s peacetime income. The guy playing America insists any peacetime bonuses he gets are “locked in” as his base income for the next turn. I say bonuses are thrown out after every turn and his base resets to 6. Until july 1939 in which his base will go up with the result of the dice roll. Thus, july 1939 6 plus d12. January 1940 base would be 6 plus the previous turns dice result plus another dice result, This goes on until he gets to 63. Which way is correct?
-
RE: Planes landing on aircraft carrier
Yea, that’s what I thought. Thanks
-
Planes landing on aircraft carrier
Hi everyone,
Have a game going on and a situation has risen. Japan Navy attacked from sea zone 42 into sea zone 41. They have three carriers. The six planes (all fighters) that were on the carriers attacked as well. Japan also brought down six Tac. bombers from Kwangsi. After the battle the fighters landed in Kwangsi and the Tacs landed on the Carriers. Is this a legal move. Allied player thinks the Tacs wouldn’t be able to land on the carriers. He was saying the fighters had to end their movement on the carriers. Thus, he says the Tacs can’t make it into the battle since they would have nowhere to land. I said the fighters don’t have to land on the carriers if they have the range to land somewhere else. Thus, freeing up carrier space for the Tacs to land. Which is right?Thanks
-
Factories on Capitols
I thought I read somewhere that when a capitol is taken its factory turns from a major to a minor. Does anybody have any input on this?
-
RE: Strafing
So what happens to the neutral Yugoslavia troops? Do they turn over to a Brittan or other allied country? Does the territory itself become allied controlled?
-
RE: Losing France Capitol on First Turn.
I’m in a game right now as the allies. I did a tech roll and got Radar. Since Japan has such a ridiculous air force I decided to send some American AA’s to india. My question "If I have British and American AA’s in the same zone I do I get two shots per plane (American=1 British =1 thus getting two shots per plane). Thanks for your help.