The not so Reluctant Admiral 4.0 Rroberson v khyberbill ALL WELCOME TO Read

[khyberbill]

The Political Points bump works both ways.

How many Japanese cities require garrisons a month's march away from the nearest troops. I am not complaining about the lost VP's, (vs Political Points) as much as the fact that there are no troops near by to garrison. So, I lose 60 or 80 VP's right off the bat. It is a cheap shot. Plain and simple. If kfsgo wants to arm wrestle me about this he can, but he should be warned that I have Beavis and Butthead arm wrestle for me. heh heh.

I have not found any bugs. The fact that Kashgar and that other city (a name that I must learn to write down) just drains VP's turn after turn and the Pensacola TF hung out to dry are non-starters for me.

[khyberbill]

So if you are going to place the Pensacola group there then you need to write them off.

Only the Pensacola got away due to a high speed dash to Balipapan.

[khyberbill]

My thinking in allowing those A-24 to start at Manila in 4.0

Let the A-24s start in Townsville or Darwin, Batavia or Singers. If a player wants to move them to Manila it only takes two or three turns. I bet you none do so. Now that the forum knows about them, they will be totally ineffective in Manila and the JFB gets the bonus of the Pensacola TF. There are lots of gifts on 7 Dec 42, another is not needed.

[John 3rd]

Didn't intend to hijack the Thread with commentary and questions. I am going to begin a new thread over in the Mod Section for more comments. Let us shift the discussion over there so you boys can go about your fight in 'peace!'

EDIT: New Thread on RA 4.1 started in Scenario Design.

[John 3rd]

Could both of you comment in the 4.1 RA Thread to work I am doing if you see anything that needs to be further addressed? Thanks.