In regards rule 14.23 does this mean that airdrops are excluded from attrition totals if they have previously in the same combat phase participated in ground...
... Yes - in either such case, the airborne unit cannot be counted in an attrition total. I hope this rule is clear on this point: 14.23 INELIGIBLE UNITS: The...
Help. Does someone out there have a fix for this. Last May I downloaded the AWAW *.chm file with all the compiled updates. Works beautifully. But every...
Greetings! This monthly information message for the "A World At War" mailing lists explains the: QUESTION & ANSWER PROTOCOL How do I ask a question? a. Check...
aworldatwar@yahoogrou...
Feb 1, 2006 11:17 am
91463
"A World at War" MAILING LIST INFO List/Website Administrator: Paul Stoecker Email: aworldatwar-owner@yahoogroups.com Official AWAW Website:...
aworldatwar@yahoogrou...
Feb 1, 2006 11:17 am
91464
... Not sure it will solve your problem but try this: Fo to this web page: www.aworldatwar.com/MonthlyUpdate.htm Right click on this link: AWAW Hyperlinked...
P.S. Any chance we can get the date on the first page of the .chm file to accurately reflect the update date? (Basically, I'm tired of seeing "28 February...
Thanks Don but this doesn't work for me. For some reason, Save Target As is greyed out on my computer. But if I left click on the link it lets me download....
Jerry, The problem is your computer is saving the file with a changed Property which does not allow the file to displayed due to your SECURITY features. Open...
Bruce, I think the existing rule is clear as to what happens to the ground units after a failed invasion, just as you say. But they aren't clear as to what...
Thank you so much Eric. Your solution works perfectly. Cheers Jerry Hearn Canberra Australia ... Property which does not allow the file to displayed due to...
This is a Security feature Microsoft has added to Windows .CHM files ... I'm not sure it's a bug, as you just mentioned it's a security feature, a lot of...
Seems like we're going back in time on www.aworldatwar.com The recent dates have 2005 as the year. It's the same problem with the updated .chm rules file. ...
Is theoretically possible in light of rules to make supply line (to cutted from rest of Russia) russians units in Caucasus. I mean for example road via:...
Isn't that what the rules say? ... From: "krisdziku" <krystian_dzikowski@...> To: <aworldatwar@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 7:24 AM ...
Bruce Harper
bruce54321@...
Feb 2, 2006 3:41 pm
91474
... the ... If you mean the dates on the 2 January News articles, Yes, that was a mistake they should have been 2006 (and are now fixed) If you mean the New...
Roger. I always forget about this. By the way, some issues are keeping me from completing the hyperlinked file update in a timely fashion this month. Pls be...
... Property which does not allow the file to displayed due to your SECURITY features. ... selecting PROPERTIES] ... protect this computer" ... files recently,...
... Kris, the answer can be found in the rules, under "Supply": 30.225 RUSSIA: A. The Urals box is an unlimited Russian supply source. B. Supply may be traced...
Well, it is possible for the Germans use all of their subs to attack the Murmansk convoy, while the ASW sits useless in the Atlantic S/W box. Were ASW classed...
I don't think so: 40.444 RESTRICTIONS ON SUBMARINE ATTACKS: Provided either Bergen or Scapa Flow are operational Axis ports: A. ATLANTIC: For every ten...
Bruce Harper
bruce54321@...
Feb 3, 2006 6:38 am
91480
So each sucessive sub attack is at -1. My opponent says that each sub attack on a Murmansk convoy takes place in a new 'hex', and therefore the -1 for each...
Wasn't there a discussion of this on the list and clarifications posted? I'm never sure - the order posts appear on this list can be really weird: ...
Bruce Harper
bruce54321@...
Feb 3, 2006 1:59 pm
91482
You are forgetting the sub attack table modifier for excess ASW in the SW box (-1 for each 3 ASW) -- if the Germans base all of their subs in the Murmansk box,...
I have a feeling that these are old posts that have already been answered, and are appearing on my e-mail very late. If so, someone has already pointed out: ...
Bruce Harper
bruce54321@...
Feb 3, 2006 3:20 pm
91484
D'oh! Always look at at least *two* rules :-) Ed ... answered, ... already ... one for ... excess of the ... in that SW ... submarine ... turn. All ASW ... ...
At the risk of generating another 'D'oh!" here is a question about which I have not been able to find the second rule. It used to be that partisans in the PTO...
At the risk of generating another 'D'oh!" here is a question about which I have not been able to find the second rule. It used to be that partisans in the PTO...
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.
