The FAQ Thread
-
@insanehoshi ah, you are right, it does say 36 only. That does lend some weight to the argument. Certainly not enough, but some. Yet more reason for a clarification.
-
A question about blockades:
Does an Island Nation such as the UK and Japan count as blocaded if their remaining naval facilities are damaged?
Another map question, are the Bearing sea and Hudson Bay sea zones adjacent, specifically for flying units?
-
Geographically they are, but there is no written info that they connect, contrary to other land and sea zones. I don’t know what we should make of this.
-
@noneshallpass The FAQ says not.
-
Ok, time to get this thread rolling again.
Some questions from Operation Skyhook:a) Must the money for upgrades (specifically SS upgrades) be set aside at the start of the turn to save of use for upgrades?
I think yes due to 11.6.b) Do captured Major shipyards act as a minor shipyard?
I think yes, from the analogy of factories.c) If the CCP of KMT attack the other, does it negate the truce?
I think yes. Nonaggression is one of the provisions of the pact.d) Can the CCP and KMT resign the truce after it has been broken?
No clue on this one.e) Can you take the militia from a recruitment roll and split them between two zones?
If no, can the CCP do it?
I think it is no, yes. See 11.5 and the CCP reference sheet.Other questions? Any answers?
-
@trig said in The FAQ Thread:
a) Must the money for upgrades (specifically SS upgrades) be set aside at the start of the turn to save of use for upgrades?
I think yes due to 11.6.No, you must declare and pay for the upgrade in advance and if you cannot place the upgrade at the end of your turn, it remains on the production chart (Rule 11.2). You cannot save IPPs then randomly decide to spend them on upgrades at the end of your turn.
b) Do captured Major shipyards act as a minor shipyard?
I think yes, from the analogy of factories.Since Rule 12.4 only refers to captured factories, I would not extend it to other facilites “by analogy”.
c) If the CCP of KMT attack the other, does it negate the truce?
I think yes. Nonaggression is one of the provisions of the pact.Obviously, this ends the truce.
d) Can the CCP and KMT resign the truce after it has been broken?
No clue on this one.Not explicitely covered by Rule 13.3, so I may be wrong but this feels like a one-time deal. Like to Molotov-Ribbentrop pact or the Japanese-Soviet non-aggression pact. Nothing prevents the players from not attacking each other once more, but they would lose the advantage of defending together and moving in the same territories.
e) Can you take the militia from a recruitment roll and split them between two zones?
If no, can the CCP do it?
I think it is no, yes. See 11.5 and the CCP reference sheet.Rule 11.5 does say “place in a land zone” which suggests that it must be the same zone for both, while the CCP NRS does say “in any of those territories”, suggesting a possible split. Rule 13.3 for the SCW says “place in any land zone” and Rule 14.4.3 for Vichy says “can be placed in any Vichy possessed land zone”.
Despite the inconsistencies in the wording, I have a feeling that all recruitment rolls were meant to be subject to the same rules. Well spotted. Definitely one for the FAQ.
-
May advanced self-propelled artillery, and Katyushas, move one space, and then make an attrition attack on an adjacent territory? I dont see in the rules either that they may, or may not, move before performing an attrition attack.
I’d think they could, but slow moving advanced artillery could not. What say you?
-
@captainnapalm interesting question. Since it seems to operate exactly as normal combat except that it happens in an adjacent zone and for one round only, I am inclined to believe both SPA and advanced artillery can move and then attrition attack.
-
A similar question was asked in a previous thread about attrition attacks and GHG answered that you cannot move the unit doing the attrition attack. No specific rule was quoted however.
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/36096/advanced-artillery-attrition-attack?_=1633466829545
-
@noneshallpass I would agree.
While it does make logical sense, until its FAQ’d, no where in the rules say you can make a combat move to make an attrition attack, therefore it can’t be done.
-
@noneshallpass I have to agree with this. Sometimes you just have to let years of A&A gaming kick in and even though the rules say you can’t… it clearly does not say you CAN. I sort of rationalize these attrition attacks to a prepared position that has ample artillery ammunition and supplies to sustain what would have been a tremendous expenditure of ammunition. Now, you are asking for those artillery units to move an entire land zone, with the ammunition and then conduct a barrage. I think it’s either or., if you have SP artillery you can move 2 and then enter into combat with the other ground/air units. OR you can you sit in the land zone you are in and conduct an attrition attack on the adjacent land zone. Just my thinking… I don’t think the game creators had a vision of SP artillery or mobile infantry towed artillery moving 2 land zones and THEN attacking a land zone ( 3 land zones now ) from their original position? Do you?
-
@HBG-GW-Enthusiast
The FAQ is up on two questions:Q: Are the Bering sea and Hudson Bay sea zones adjacent?
A: No
Q: Do Island Nations (Great Britain and Japan) count as blocaded if their remaining naval facilities are damaged?
A: No.
-
@trig said in The FAQ Thread:
Q: Do Island Nations (Great Britain and Japan) count as blockaded if their remaining naval facilities are damaged?
A: No.
This is an important clarification!
-
@trig regarding the militia question: from the FAQ -
"can you place the two militia from a successful recruitment roll in two different land zones?
A. yes -
During German Lightning War, can they strategic rail move twice?
-
@insanehoshi said in The FAQ Thread:
During German Lightning War, can they strategic rail move twice?
Page 46, 10.4 Strategic Rail Movement, “Regions of the map have different rail capacity defined as the number of units each player can strategic rail move each turn.”
I would say no, because the limits on strategic rail moves are not per phase, but per turn. The tricky question is, could you strategic rail move on the first non-combat phase? Looking over the rules, I guess you could!
-
@hbg-gw-enthusiast
@insaneHoshi
I would say yes, as it is a noncombat move, and you do noncombat movement phase twice. Most “per turn” stuff goes out the window with lightning war. -
Island Nations and Blockade Loophole:
Japan and Great Britain are Island Nations and can not loose IPP to convoy raiding when their island is blocaded.
A blockade is defined in 8.11 is
If you have three or more surface warships in a sea zone, they blockade all enemy naval facilities in that sea zone…
And example of combat movement is blockading.
So the loophole is as follows: Say Britain is blockaded at the start of the german turn. Can Germany:
- Move a ship out of that zone in combat movement, thus unblockading GB, raid their convoy lines, and then non-combat move back into the zone to reactivate the blockade?
- Move a ship out of that zone in combat movement, thus unblockading GB, and then declare a combat move with another ship into the zone, raid their convoy lines, and then resolve the combat move back into the zone to reactivate the blockade?
An obvious answer may be that blocading is a combat move, which causes the blockade to engage in the combat movement phase. But this begs the question: Do you specifically need to declare a combat move to blockade and can the ships involved participate in any other combat movement? I think if you say that blocading is specifically a combat movement action, one would think that if those ships are participating in any other sort of combat, they cant blockade. Would this also mean that a nation would only have too eliminate the blockading fleet (well reduce them to < 3 ships) even if there was another enemy fleet present in that zone (which did something else in its combat move)?
-
@insanehoshi You are an evil monster, Hoshi! I never want to play against you!!!
-
@hbg-gw-enthusiast yea I think he really wants to rub it in when he is winning!
Suggested Topics
