Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

[Panther]

@barnee

The rulebooks are now provided by Renegade, as noted here:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/post/1622808

[barnee]

@Panther So i don’t see any difference in the new link. At least as far as what I’m asking. From Renegade Europe

The United States may not declare war on any Axis power
unless an Axis power either declares war on it first or
captures London or any territory in North America, after
which it may declare war on any or all Axis powers on its
following turn.

Renegade Pacific

*It may not
declare war on Japan unless Japan first declares war on it or
makes an unprovoked declaration of war against the United
Kingdom or ANZAC. Following any such unprovoked
declaration of war by Japan, the United States will receive an
immediate one-time bonus payment of 30 IPCs, representing
the total mobilization and transfer of military assets within
the continental United States. *

I know USA doesn’t get the 30 PU bonus. Is there a Global specific scenario ?

I’ll just ask my question directly to you.

In Global 1940, If JPN Declares War on UK and ANZAC Round 2 but not the USA, can the USA Declare War on JPN and All Axis Round 2 ? That same turn ?

Or must they wait until Round 3 ?

My reading of it says USA needs to wait until Round 3.

Thanks

[simon33]

You are still not looking in the global rules which are at the back of the manual.

[barnee]

@simon33 I will look again Thanks for replying

[barnee]

@simon33 OK I finally found it. Triplea does this correctly. USA is able to DOW on JPN Round 2 the same turn JPN Declared War on UK/ANZAC.

[oysteilo]

its asked before…

@Panther @simon33 @gamerman01 @MrRoboto

Japan controls Philippines, but has no land or air units there,

There is a defending japanese sub in the sea zone (sz35)

USA attacks with 2 destroyers, a bunch of planes and a transport carrying a mech

Both destroyers are dead by kamikaze

what happens? Can the mech capture philippines or does the sub prevent it?

Unsure if the kamikaze is a sea battle or not

[gamerman01]

The sub prevention is for combat move only.

You are in the combat phase. Both destroyers are gone, so you have loaded transport vs. sub. Sub gets a shot, and if it misses, the transport retreats because the attacker has no chance against that sub now

[gamerman01]

Kamikazes do create a sea battle - one kamikaze stops all bombardment

[oysteilo]

so philippines are under japanese control and transport and mech has to retreat? after a failed sub defense shoot

[gamerman01]

The transport can’t possibly beat a sub, so the mech will never be able to land. Best case scenario for attacker is getting the hell out after a sub miss

[gamerman01]

That is the power of kamikaze!!! :fearful:

[gamerman01]

eh - kamikazes plus submarine, that is. The kamikazes alone can’t stop the landing since they can’t hurt transports, of course

[oysteilo]

@gamerman01 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

That is the power of kamikaze!!! :fearful:

I did right then!

[Myygames]

@gamerman01 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

The sub prevention is for combat move only.

You are in the combat phase. Both destroyers are gone, so you have loaded transport vs. sub. Sub gets a shot, and if it misses, the transport retreats because the attacker has no chance against that sub now

I was also wondering about this scenario.

My interpretation would be that the US player can chose to ignore the sub in the CM. This is possible due to surface warships present. US DD are then sunk in the Combat phase.

I would assume the sub is still ignored. Is this incorrect? @gamerman01 ?

[pacifiersboard]

@Myygames

I think that combat is created by kamikaze rather than the attacker.

[gamerman01]

No, I was wrong.
I searched for Krieghund’s responses on the matter, and he clearly states that kamikazes don’t force combat.
The destroyers are sunk, but the transport can conduct amphibious assault despite the sub because kamikazes don’t create a sea battle.

[gamerman01]

@Krieghund said in Carrier escape from kamikazi:

@surfer said in Carrier escape from kamikazi:

BTW, how is the scramble any different than kamikazi? Neither are in play at the time of combat movement. There is no combat in either case–only the defender’s option to combat.
I would think if you could avoid combat from scramble, then you should be able to avoid combat from kamikazi.

Krieghund’s reply:

A scramble forces a sea battle, while a kamikaze strike does not. A kamikaze strike is a single attack against a single unit, not a full-blown battle.

[Myygames]

@gamerman01 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

No, I was wrong.
I searched for Krieghund’s responses on the matter, and he clearly states that kamikazes don’t force combat.
The destroyers are sunk, but the transport can conduct amphibious assault despite the sub because kamikazes don’t create a sea battle.

Thank you for clarity! This is a really complicated coincidence of several complicated rules ;-)

Sub plus kamikaze is still powerful though…

[gamerman01]

@Myygames said in [Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)]

Thank you for clarity! This is a really complicated coincidence of several complicated rules ;-)

Thank you for giving me a break. Your last post made me look deeper!
Now I have it written in my rulebook. (I didn’t find this question in the FAQ)

[oysteilo]

@gamerman01 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@Myygames said in [Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)]

Thank you for clarity! This is a really complicated coincidence of several complicated rules ;-)

Thank you for giving me a break. Your last post made me look deeper!
Now I have it written in my rulebook. (I didn’t find this question in the FAQ)

not a silly question then! Hahaha