The only restriction is that a transport may not offload for an amphibious assault if there is an enemy sub in the sea zone unless there is also a warship (of any type) belonging to the same power in the sea zone at the end of combat movement.
why would they need another warship to make it legal?
Few quick questions:
Sub against sub. If the defender decides to submerge, does the attacker still get one first strike attack?
Amphibious assault from a sea zone that also contains an enemy transport. Can I use a sub/destroyer to kill the transport but have my battleship bombard from the same zone, even though there is technically combat in that zone?
Defending carrier in an open sea zone (no land nearby) takes one hit but survives. It’s planes auto-die even though they won the fight?
Few quick questions:
Sub against sub. If the defender decides to submerge, does the attacker still get one first strike attack?
Amphibious assault from a sea zone that also contains an enemy transport. Can I use a sub/destroyer to kill the transport but have my battleship bombard from the same zone, even though there is technically combat in that zone?
Defending carrier in an open sea zone (no land nearby) takes one hit but survives. It’s planes auto-die even though they won the fight?
I think attacking sub gets pot shot, and I believe you loose shore bombardment if you engage the transport, also think planes die.
why would they need another warship to make it legal?
This is in the Alpha Rules.
Sub against sub. If the defender decides to submerge, does the attacker still get one first strike attack?
Amphibious assault from a sea zone that also contains an enemy transport. Can I use a sub/destroyer to kill the transport but have my battleship bombard from the same zone, even though there is technically combat in that zone?
Defending carrier in an open sea zone (no land nearby) takes one hit but survives. It’s planes auto-die even though they won the fight?
No.
No.
Yes.
So sub on sub “battles” are basically not going to happen?
So if there is a German sub at the Norway convoy zone, the Russian sub from Murmansk essentially cannott clear it out to regain the +5 NO bonus?
Without a destroyer, the only way you can successfully attack a sub is if it wants to fight.
So sub on sub “battles” are basically not going to happen?
So if there is a German sub at the Norway convoy zone, the Russian sub from Murmansk essentially cannott clear it out to regain the +5 NO bonus?
You can move your Russian sub into that sea zone during your combat movement phase, but only after you do so, the german sub gets the option to submerge or fight before any dice are rolled. therefore you could coax him into a battle but more often than not, he will submerge and continue to deny Russia their NO.
@Young:
So sub on sub “battles” are basically not going to happen?
So if there is a German sub at the Norway convoy zone, the Russian sub from Murmansk essentially cannott clear it out to regain the +5 NO bonus?
You can move your Russian sub into that sea zone during your combat movement phase, but only after you do so, the german sub gets the option to submerge or fight before any dice are rolled. therefore you could coax him into a battle but more often than not, he will submerge and continue to deny Russia their NO.
Gotta buy a Russian destroyer! Or do the dirty work with the UK or USA. (In the case of the Russian NO)
- Defending carrier in an open sea zone (no land nearby) takes one hit but survives. It’s planes auto-die even though they won the fight?
- Yes.
There is one other possibility to save your planes. If there is room on an undamaged carrier in any of the adjoining sea zones, the fighter(s) are allowed to fly one space to safety.
I have a further clarification I would like for the CV example. Say the CV was attacked by only subs. They get 1 hit on the CV. do the ftrs still perish or are they aboard the damaged CV because they couldn’t fight the subs anyways. Remember this is in open waters.
I have a further clarification I would like for the CV example. Say the CV was attacked by only subs. They get 1 hit on the CV. do the ftrs still perish or are they aboard the damaged CV because they couldn’t fight the subs anyways. Remember this is in open waters.
This is a quick reply if you are looking for one. Not Official.
During a combat, defending air units on board carriers in that sea zone are considered airborne regardless of if their combat dice get applied to units, people normally don’t roll dice for them if only subs remain and they have no destroyer per the sub special abilities.
The damaged carrier can not land planes. The planes get 1 movement point to reach a landing site. Failure results in removal.
Also, to address allied planes on your carrier if it comes up:
During your combat move, air units on board a carrier are considered airborne if they are yours, they are considered cargo if not. This prevents your air units from “riding” on the carrier, and then “launching”. Hence your planes have 4 movement from where they begin the turn, not where the carrier ends up.
Since this was a defensive battle, any allied planes were airborne to help defend as allied units defend together, allied planes are only cargo if your carrier enters combat through its combat move. If that were the case, they would be stuck on the carrier until repaired should damage be applied and lost if the carrier is lost.
Since that is not the case in your question, they have 1 space to move. Your planes are never cargo on your ships.
I have seen 1 carrier and 2 planes destroyed many times by 1 or 2 attacking subs. Always build a destroyer with the carrier (cost is 24 combined) when enemy subs are near to prevent this.
England is under German control, British troops from Calcutta take Persia and Syria from the Italians. Does the Calcutta economy increase or are those IPCs in limbo?
@Young:
England is under German control, British troops from Calcutta take Persia and Syria from the Italians. Does the Calcutta economy increase or are those IPCs in limbo?
In limbo. Calcutta can never collect any income on the Europe board (except in Alpha2, may collect West India, and can never collect W Canada)
However, if the USSR or USA were to take those territories, they would collect income from them until London is liberated.
Thanks, thats a tricky one.
@Young:
Thanks, thats a tricky one.
Definitely. I’ve listened at Krieg’s feet long enough that I know my way through a lot of these messes….
@Young:
Thanks, thats a tricky one.
Definitely. I’ve listened at Krieg’s feet long enough that I know my way through a lot of these messes….
me (allies) and my buddy (axis) got into an argument about it last weekend, I read him the rule book and convinced him I was right (liberating territories when a friendly capital is under enemy control). Well, you just proved me wrong and now I gotta put my tail between my legs and let him know. Where does the rule book mention that UK is an exception to the rule? is it in political situations?
Does anyone know where A&A Global 1940 Ranks on most top 100 board game lists?
@Young:
@Young:
Thanks, thats a tricky one.
Definitely. I’ve listened at Krieg’s feet long enough that I know my way through a lot of these messes….
me (allies) and my buddy (axis) got into an argument about it last weekend, I read him the rule book and convinced him I was right (liberating territories when a friendly capital is under enemy control). Well, you just proved me wrong and now I gotta put my tail between my legs and let him know. Where does the rule book mention that UK is an exception to the rule? is it in political situations?
I cannot point you to the exact errata, I would suggest perusing the Alpha 2 rules or the FAQ on Larry Harris’ website. One excellent reason for the rule, and something that helps not only understand it but make other UK Europe/Pacific rules less challenging, is to always remember that UK territories on the Europe board go to London and Pacific board territories go to India. This makes counting IPC’s much easier too. Always-always-always.
Another way to look at it is, how could India liberate these UK territories for India? They are on the Europe map and London would want control of them even if they cannot collect. Also all units are UK units and not UK pacific or UK Europe.
Good point.
@Young:
Does anyone know where A&A Global 1940 Ranks on most top 100 board game lists?
Global 1940 specifically? Probably none and it probably won’t ever. There aren’t any “official” lists for that sort of thing - most are user generated based on reviews, etc, on sites like BGG. And because A&A 1940 Global is a far more niche market than even A&A 1942, I doubt it could ever crack a top 100 that appeals to a FAR wider audience.
A&A classic, which can probably be interchanged with Revised or 1942 updates, might make a few. But really, we’re talking a LOT of competition with games that are more accessible, more nuanced, or quite frankly, more fun even when you’re losing and don’t suffer from avalanches of defeat - “German Games” like Ticket to Ride, Puerto Rico, Settlers of Catan, Powergrid, etc will always rank higher. Even Roborally usually gets notice before A&A. And that doesn’t even take into account the family boardgames (clue, sorry, parcheesi), Card and CCGs (MtG, Apples to Apples, Munchkin - most lists usually make exceptions and include card or CCGs now). And games like Small World or Kill Dr Lucky, which are great for fast, fun diversions usually get a place first. Plus I’d imagine Risk makes it on a list before A&A.
This is not meant to dismiss A&A - I loves it, but it definately appeals to a very select type of gamer.
