At the end of Winter 1941, British resistance is at -4. The US entered the war during the Win 41 Axis turn. North Africa is Vichy, there are no Axis units in...
Tim, U.S. air and naval units are no longer sufficient to prevent the transfer of British possessions to Germany during concession. I would consider how that ...
Eric, Let's assume no change. The two issues are: A) Does Britain remain at war with the Axis after a surrender owing to the US remaining at war? B) In the...
... "If the U.S. ... withdraws from the war in Europe following a British surrender ... because Germany has adopted a policy of forbearance (59.75A), ..." The...
... Don's reply is correct, but I want to expand on one thing that I think is causing confusion. There are two different ways for the US to withdraw from the...
The very last sentence ... is also in the original. But what does it (or could it) mean? Because of 21.313, the only way there can be "surplus" carriers...
... I agree that in practice I have never seen it come up. But I thought it was to cover something like: Four small groups intercept. All four groups...
... I have seen this mistake before. There is no requirement that the first combat group *must* be 25 factors. The rule reads "may not contain more than 25...
... http://www.boardgamers.org/wbc/sampler.htm The other showcased games are small and quick, but either our smaller scenarios or perhaps one (volunteering)...
... Right. ... I'm not sure why this is, though. Just because you supply Madras from Australia doesn't mean you can't also supply Noumea, etc., from...
... This is not a mistake. This is the rules. ... True. But the entire rule (bullet) is: "May not contain more than 25 naval factors; any surplus forms a...
... But where does it say the surplus must equal the amount over 25 factors? It doesn't. The surplus is the amount in excess of the **first TF.** The first TF...
... Her again we (you and I) have disagreement about what 22.421A means. If this time is like that last time, you will not convince me and I will not convince...
So what happens when the redeployment of unescorted carriers is intercepted, and the player can't form any CGs that meet the carrier/fleet-factor requirement?...
... This has nothing to do with 22.241A. ... Similarly, this has nothign to do with 22.241A. I think you are confusing unrelated rules and situations. DonMoody...
Then the "excess" clause governs what happens if there are too many factors for a single CG. It doesn't say anything about a minimum number of factors. Are...
I think the intentions are clear. A combined force of 1-25 factors forms one combat group. A combined force of 26-50 factors should form two combat groups...
I all also say that - much like the last debate about 22.421A - I think this is being unnecessarily complicated (i.e. this is easier in play than this...
... So you are actually saying that if there are 25 FF you have on CG (no choice) but if you have 26 FF you can combine them into two CGs however you want? ...
... Not surprising, I think you are misrepresenting what I have previously said. I also think the intentions of the rule are more than sufficiently clear but...
... I think that this statement is something I agree with 100%. Unfortuantely, you and I have come to completely different conclusions. I have to admit I am...
here is the latest version again: Combat groups formed by combining small naval forces or the combination of encumbered and unencumbered naval forces: o May...
I think this discussion is pretty meaningless, so I am not really following it. I understand the disagreement - whether when a combat group is formed (say by...
Bruce Harper
bruce54321@...
Jun 2, 2009 12:58 am
117384
... Correct. The reason it is a problem is that if the first combat group *must* be 25 factors, you can plausibly wind up in situations where the second combat...
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.
