Slitherine

Schnurri wrote:In my hotseat I cleared the way of Russians and let the Panzers get there as quickly as possible and was only able to rail at the end of Sept. Sea invasion would have been 1 turn faster I think.

If you already tested this by moving the Russians out of the way then your 'turn 39' answer is likely correct. It's been awhile since I posted this question &
I may just have based the calculation on the developers rail conversion speed notes. In that case my error might have been assuming the conversion starts on the invasion turn, when it actually would start on invasion turn +1. If I find out anything else in a re-test I'll post it. Either way, feel free to continue the game Schnurri .

Regarding faster rail using a sea invasion - pretty sure that is not how the rail conversion feature works. I'm basing that on paradrop tests (similar to a sea invasion in that you reach hexes far behind the front line) where the rail conversion speed remained the same, and those paratroops had to wait a long time for rail access even when a land supply path reached them a turn or two later.

Something easy then. What is the maximum distance an airborne unit can drop in the game (max hexes).

Schnurri wrote:Something easy then. What is the maximum distance an airborne unit can drop in the game (max hexes).

Airborne units have the same range as fighters, and max fighter range in the game is 11. I think that's your answer.

That is correct. You are up sir.

Okay, another easy one. Who fires first, attacker or defender, in the following combat situations?

1. Ground vs. Ground

2. Naval vs. Naval

3. Air vs. Air

4. Air vs. Ground (Air is attacker)

1. Defender
2. Attacker
3. Simultaneous
4. Defender (?)

GogTheMild wrote:1. Defender
2. Attacker
3. Simultaneous
4. Defender (?)

You are correct, sir. Initiative is yours.

The game randomly generates convoy sizes. If the number generated is below a certain size that there is no convoy. What is the minimum convoy size?

12.

Correct. You're 'it'.

How can you encircle (in one turn) one of the German units when your GAR is stationed in Oslo and there are two German units stationed in neighbouring hexes?

Ha ha, you taught me the answer to that one. But I don't have a question so will let someone else answer

Well, maybe you will have to answer this one, anyway .

Well, assuming that one of the Germans is SE of Oslo could you load your Gar onto a transport, which will (have to) appear two hexes S of Oslo, then immediately unload it to the NE. (I think that you can do that; I'm new to this game.) To complete the encirclement, buy a new Gar and set it up NE of Oslo. Probably a good idea to buy a second Gar as well to put in Oslo itself if there is a second German adjacent.

Or am I barking up a completely incorrect tree?

Yeah, the correct answer is to load GAR on a transport and unload it in an empty hex, all in the same turn . I didn't check the hexes you mentioned, but I will accept your answer, anyway.

Oh dear. I must be the newest player on these forums. OK:

Newly captured ports cannot repair some naval units. Which ones?

Ports are damaged when captured, and so they cannot repair anything until they begin to recover. Recovery begins two turns after capture, if I remember my in-game experiences right.

Yes, ports are reduced to zero. And yes, them then not being able to repair whilst at zero makes sense. This may even be correct - I haven't had the experience, as I said I am new to CEAW. BUT, it is not what the manual states . So I am going to class that as an incorrect answer, unless anyone knows different.

It seems that we will need a bit more help here... I always presumed that you cannot repair any naval units if the port is reduced to 0. Last time I checked, even subs couldn't be repaired in such ports, while you can repair them at sea, 1 step at a time. I could be wrong, though.

Fair enough, I'll give that to JimR. The manual says, twice: "Captured ports are reduced to 0-strength, which means that they won’t be
able to repair or upgrade naval units with red damage (0-1 strength)". Which may just be a complicated way of saying the same thing, although to my eye it seems to mean something different. (Probably I need to get my eyes tested.)