Small question on the sequence of events when a carrier force attacks a base. The rule in question reads: 23.411 EFFECT OF DEFENDING AIR - PORTS: 23.4111...
It looks like only SRs are limited to two units per origin or destination - I can NR more than two units out of a port and more than two units into a port as...
On 1 Sep 2007/11:01, Peter Rogers gave me the pleasure of reading ([aworldatwar] Attack ... We've played "before" i.e. defender reveals, then attacker assigns....
Any number of units may NR through any one port or ports. Dave Hanson Markus Kässbohrer <Lists@...> wrote: It looks like only SRs are limited to two...
Correct. Mike. ... From: Markus Kässbohrer To: aworldatwar@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 7:07 AM Subject: Re: [aworldatwar] Stacking...
Mike Crowe
mcrowe@...
Sep 1, 2007 1:38 pm
105725
according to Rule 25.13, the number of subs that may conduct SW is limited by the turn, while the remaining subs, if built, must operate on the Pacific...
A ruling is in order, as the last sentence lends itself to your interpretation, and I do not think it is correct. I've always played you could deploy the subs...
Mike Crowe
mcrowe@...
Sep 2, 2007 12:12 am
105727
The answer appears directly in the rule you quote, Maurice. 25.13 presumes that the submarine "operates" during its owner's player turn. (True, the submarine...
Dave is correct for the reasons he cites. If you can increase the number of subs in, say, Fa42, then you deploy another one to the SW box in Su42. Eric...
Are you asking about the number if units that can be stacked after you SR 2 ground units into an objective? I don't think it matters if any units were already...
Hello AWAW enthusiasts! If Germany airdrops into an English port in Spr'40, are England and France considered one attrition zone for total allied factors,...
England and France are two separate attrition zones. 14.211 ATTRITION ZONES: Each area of contiguous hexes on the same front controlled by the same alliance...
... That would normally be true. But there is this exception: 14.212 AIRDROPS: Attrition zones which contain airborne units which airdropped in the previous...
... Yes, a 3rd result in 1943. they are expensive but wanted to try to get a big Vlasov army out this game. ... beginning ... in ... staging distance of the...
... The above is from Joe's 30 August post. I would like more details about the atomic research Joe mentioned. I am inferring it was: - 4 Atomic BTs by the end...
All I do not like the new uranium seperation table. I feel that a +1 or +2 mod should be given when a roll does not quite make it. Here is the Alllied atomic...
Normally you don't roll until 1945. ... From: william steiner To: aworldatwar@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 6:40 PM Subject: Re:...
Bruce Harper
bruce54321@...
Sep 6, 2007 2:24 am
105739
... See below. ... I do not think this is legal. As per 41.31C, the uranium plant and plutonium reactor production projects are high tech projects (only 1 RP...
I disagree, Bill. Perhaps not everyone is aware of this by analyzing the table, but (as we redesigned it) the option to roll for either Uranium Separation or...
IMHO you under invest atomic program Bill. Small 1 RP for General Atomic is not enough, if seriously think about atomic bombing. I also think that there is a...
... But you may only produce one Uranium Plant per year [emphasis added]: 42.25 ATOMIC: A. URANIUM PLANTS: 8 for each uranium plant, at the rate of ***one...
... I don't think this is correct either. As per Bill's original post, the 3rd Atomic BT was not achieved in 1944. So, to produce a plant in 1944, it would...
... 1945. ... If I recall correctly, the fourth BT was in Spring 1944. There was a "2" rolled for Uranium in Summer, no result, so I had to roll for it again...
Perfect...and with his roll of "2" he would get 1 bomb in winter 1945 and a 2nd bomb in winter 1946. Just in time to seal a defeat for himself. Personally, if...
It may be the game could be improved by an automatic victory for the Allied no later than Fall 1945 - based on the assumption that the historical atomic bomb...
Bruce Harper
bruce54321@...
Sep 6, 2007 3:10 pm
105748
I agree with Greg's analysis below; even waiting until 1945, if the WA roll badly they aren't getting atomics in time to matter. From one of our games at...
I think telling players that the results of your Atomic Research plan is going to dicate whether you win or lose is unfair. I also don't think anyone has ever...
Having problems with message search?
Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.
