The FAQ Thread

[Trig]

@noneshallpass
For me the problem lie in that allies may share bases.
According to the first question on the FAQ, this means that allied fighters can scramble from allied airbases. The question then, is that unit that allows a scramble shared? Is that section of the sentence allies or nation? The “it” is just to vague.

[Trig]

Nevermind. The errata is up:
Page 35: 8.6
“Airbases allows its owner to send up to three Fighters into combat in adjacent zones where its Alliance has at least one Defending unit or facility. Scramble is declared at the end of the Attacker’s Combat Movement.”

[insaneHoshi]

A couple of more

• This may have already been answered, but can Germany LL IPC to Vichy to complete ships on their build chart (despite them lacking a factory)
• When damaging a railway, is the entire railway network in a land zone affected, or is just one of the boarder crossings affected? Also if its the latter, can you specifically bomb a railway’s connection to a facility (like a shipyard)

[Mark the Shark]

@insanehoshi in answer to question one Yes.
Question 2: you can bomb a railway to break the chain, you can also bomb a port or other naval facility to make them useless until repaired.

[CaptainNapalm]

@insanehoshi On page 61 of the rulebook, as well as the Vichy France reference sheet:
For ships on the French Production Chart, roll a D12:
DIE ROLL RESULT
1-7 Scuttled, remove from game.
8-10 Remains Vichy French and
stays on the Production chart
until Vichy France Aligns to a
Major Power or surrenders.
Germany can lend-lease IPP to
Vichy for completion.
11-12 Replace with German
equivalent on the
Production chart.

[General 6 Stars]

Ok. I need you 36 39 guys to give me your opinion on this rule I have and want to make a change. Figured most would not see this question in house rules. I’ll post link here.
If you guys want this removed no problem.
Thanks

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/37035/when-moscow-falls-to-axis/8

[Chris_Henry]

@gen-manstein I probably should understand your background a bit.

Looks like you have a house rule where every two turns Soviet infantry defend at +1 for a winter rule (cool rule, btw)? And it looks like you have a special rule for how many units can be built on a territory, looks like double the territory value? You mention 4 months as well, have you modified your rules where 3 game turns equals a year?

Probably not really important to your overall questions, which look largely around what’s fair for the German player to build/do on Moscow.

What about a rule where captured territories with factories, whether captured or built, can only build a maximum of 1 unit? You eliminate the German ability to produce a lot of units far from home that way which, I agree with you, is a bit unrealistic that they could conceivably churn out a large number of units that quickly.

“1. Should russia get to build and place units at a factory and move at end of turn.”

That seems like a pretty hefty Russian advantage, even if the reasoning is impending capital takeover.

“2. Should Germany get to build 6 units in Moscow that fast ? 4 months but can’t move till following turn but can defend Moscow better.”

Kind of what I said above, I agree that Germany maybe shouldn’t be allowed to build 6 units in Moscow.

Some potential rule thoughts below:

• What if you had a rule where, on the next Russian turn after Moscow falls, the Russians can build new factories elsewhere for cheaper that their original cost? Like, if you’re playing the base game cost of a Major Factory at 6/6/6, maybe they only cost half that?
• Or a rule where, instead of it taking 3 turns to build a new major factory, maybe you can build one in a single turn that first turn after Moscow falls?
• If your rule currently is that you lose all money when your capital is taken (like base game rules), maybe a special Soviet rule where they only lose half? That way they can rebuild quickly like my above thoughts?

I think you’re trying to simulate the historical ability of the Russians to move factories quickly for use, while also not handicapping the Russians in game such a great deal in the situations like you’re describing, have I got that right? The above might alleviate those concerns. You can still build to protect Moscow without moving your existing factory, without having to worry about the Germans being able to build a lot of men by limiting them to one unit per factory in captured territories, while also allowing the Russians to quickly rebuild a factory elsewhere by allowing them to keep some money and/or lowering the cost/build time of Russian factories for that first turn after Moscow capture only?

Sorry if I’ve misunderstood your question.

[General 6 Stars]

Thanks for reply. First off this is for my game and not 36/39. If anybody didn’t know.
Yes all your suggestions have been looked at.
Only major factory’s at capitals. Minors can only be built on rest of territories and produce up to territory value only. So really not a problem with German builds until the Moscow ic is involved.
Also to let you know Russia can move 1 factory per turn undamaged and if they get there NA Russian factories can 1 time in game move 2 factories once in game.
So yes moving factories needs to be done in order to build later and further east in Urals.

Yes will look at getting half of Russia’s money if Moscow falls. Up to Germany to not damage the oil derricks in Middle East and convoy raid supplies to archangel to receive a decent amount of money when Moscow’s captured.

Russia will still get to collect income for rest of territories they control. Plus also they get a free tank at tankograd and can buy another for 4 icps so they still can buy good stuff. Plus figs and they do receive 1 LL unit from chart.
Should explain all Russia stuff.
They can also receive a inf or mech if they get both theses NAs in game. So they have really no problem building back up some.
Thinking with going with
Moscow falls factory moves to Samara.
Germany receives half of Russia’s money and the 6 icps for territory value.

[Chris_Henry]

@gen-manstein Got it. Sorry, I think I knew you had your own game based on being on the boards for however many years now. But I guess I wasn’t thinking of it as essentially your own thing almost entirely!

So a lot of my stuff probably wasn’t helpful then haha.

So I see your conundrum then, as that’s the Soviet players’ only Major Factory possibility, since they’re only available on capitals. Not sure you’d want to do this, but you could just say that the turn Moscow falls, the Soviets can rebuild for free a Major Factory on the site of their new capital (Samara), but that this is only a one time thing? You could avoid different money scenarios that way that I listed above. That seems maybe “too easy” to have done though.

Your game sounds great.

[General 6 Stars]

Well the factory would move to Samara and can build 2 units. But still have 2 more factories on 2 separate territories worth 2 and 2 builds at Tankograd. The East Ukraine and Archangel factories would be moved. And Stalingrad factory too can build 4. So u can build a total of 12 units after Moscow falls.

Also winter is every 3 turns.

All I know one game Moscow fell and Russians held Stalingrad. Paris was liberated which it should be if Germany needs to send a lot to Moscow and get. Also Moscow we think is close to defending itself and if it falls Germans won’t have much there.

Thanks for your replies !

[Chris_Henry]

Will be curious how you reconcile the issue!

[General 6 Stars]

@chris_henry said in The FAQ Thread:

Will be curious how you reconcile the issue!

Will play in a few weeks.
Going with
Moscow falls, factory goes to Samara
Germany receives half of Russia’s income.
Already played a game where I moved factory out of Moscow before get attacked next turn.
But Ger didn’t get no income.

[CaptainNapalm]

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in The FAQ Thread:

The only time the Coastal Artillery gets shots is if enemy ships pass through the sea zone (enters one side and exits other side of the sea zone, even if that is on a subsequent turn).

I’d like to revisit this rule, about coastal artillery at narrow crossings, as prompted by our V4 discussions. In my opinion, the rule is a fun idea, but it doesn’t work, and needs to be fixed or scratched.

If my UK navy is already sitting in SZ 25 when Germany places a coastal gun, does that navy ever get shot at, when they leave the SZ, in either direction?

If some of my navy joins that navy from the North, and some of my navy joins that navy from the South, do I need to keep all three “navies” separate, as they would follow different rules when leaving the sea zone?

[General 6 Stars]

Why can’t the rule just be any navy entering the sz and stops gets shot at. Also any time a navy passes through sz or by gun from either direction gets shot at.

[CaptainNapalm]

@gen-manstein said in The FAQ Thread:

Why can’t the rule just be any navy entering the sz and stops gets shot at. Also any time a navy passes through sz or by gun from either direction gets shot at.

I like the simplicity, but that sounds over-powered.

Maybe each Coastal Gun should be limited to one shot, at these narrow Crossings.

[General 6 Stars]

@captainnapalm said in The FAQ Thread:

@gen-manstein said in The FAQ Thread:

Why can’t the rule just be any navy entering the sz and stops gets shot at. Also any time a navy passes through sz or by gun from either direction gets shot at.

I like the simplicity, but that sounds over-powered.

Well then just passing through either direction.

[CaptainNapalm]

@gen-manstein said in The FAQ Thread:

@captainnapalm said in The FAQ Thread:

@gen-manstein said in The FAQ Thread:

Why can’t the rule just be any navy entering the sz and stops gets shot at. Also any time a navy passes through sz or by gun from either direction gets shot at.

I like the simplicity, but that sounds over-powered.

Well then just passing through either direction.

I assume you mean, only passing through in one turn? Because the rule is already about only when passing through, but it includes passing through on subsequent turns. And that is the hard thing to track

That would make game mechanics easier, but I don’t think it seems realistic that a Navy could pass through, without getting shot at, if they stayed there one turn, for example.

[General 6 Stars]

Do you mean if pass through in non combat it gets shot at ? Subsequent turns ?

[CaptainNapalm]

@gen-manstein said in The FAQ Thread:

Do you mean if pass through in non combat it gets shot at ? Subsequent turns ?

It means following turns.

[General 6 Stars]

So your saying like 3 different navies pass by gun and they all get shot at ?