Regarding SZ 110, I got hosed one time on a UK scramble. Usually as Germany, I send 3 fighters, 3 Stukas, 1 bombers and sometimes 1 sub to SZ 110. Our UK player had gotten in the habit of not scrambling in order to save the RAF for future action.
Well, this one game I made the mistake of just assuming UK would not scramble. I sent 2 fighters, 2 Stukas and 1 bomber to SZ 110. The other fighter and Stuka I sent to kill the French fleet in SZ 93. Well, UK taught me a lesson. They scrambled and wiped out my planes. I didn’t even kill all the ships in the channel.
Never made that mistake again.
AAG40 FAQ
-
Quick question while on the subject of transports.
At the beginning of turn 3, 5 German transports are in SZ 114, along with 1 German Cruiser, 1 German Destroyer, and 1 German Battleship. There is also a Russian Cruiser there. If Germany declares war on Russia on that turn, can those transports load units from Germany and make an amphibious assault on Novgorod that same turn?
What if there is also a sub in sz 115? If the transports have already participated in combat in sz 114, can they do it again in sz 115?
-
Quick question while on the subject of transports.
At the beginning of turn 3, 5 German transports are in SZ 114, along with 1 German Cruiser, 1 German Destroyer, and 1 German Battleship. There is also a Russian Cruiser there. If Germany declares war on Russia on that turn, can those transports load units from Germany and make an amphibious assault on Novgorod that same turn?
What if there is also a sub in sz 115? If the transports have already participated in combat in sz 114, can they do it again in sz 115?
You can load units in a hostile seazone if the seazone became hostile only because of your declaration of war on that turn. In your example, the Russian cruiser in 114 does not prevent Germany from loading in 114.
Assuming you’re playing Alpha 3 (try to state your rule set when posing questions), the sub will block an amphibious assault unless you bring ANY german warship with the transports (a sub counts).
The transports CANNOT participate in combat in 114 if you intend to use them in a combat move (amphibious assault) on SZ 115.
So, in your example of units, you could leave the BB to take on the cruiser, and move the destroyer and cruiser with the transports to kill the russian sub in 115, and then perform the amphibious assault on novgorad. Or, you could move all units to 115 and not conduct combat on the sub at all and just amphib but have a couple bombardment shots. Or you could move all units and blow the sub out of the water and then amphib, but not have any bombardment shots. Or mix and match - kill the cruiser, bring the cruiser with the transports, ignore the sub, get a bombard with the cruiser when you amphib, etc etc etc.
-
Cool. Thanks for the response. And, yes I should have put that I am playing A3.
-
� Leave the sea zone, load units, and return to the same sea
zone to conduct combat (you cannot load units while in a
hostile sea zone)A hostile sea zone does not contain friendly units. A shared sea zone contains enemy and friendly units. In this section of the book it uses the term shared sea zone. Then it uses the term sharing again
If you are sharing a sea zone with enemy surface warships
It is not “hostile” seazone if it is refered to as a shared sea zone. That part of the quote is so you can’t leave the sea zone into a hostile sea zone and load from there.
-
You can load units in a hostile seazone if the seazone became hostile only because of your declaration of war on that turnWhere is this from? quote your rules please.
-
The rules define a hostile sea zone as one which contains surface warships belonging to a power with which you are at war. Nowhere do the rules define (or even mention) “shared” sea zones. They do mention “sharing” a sea zone, but that has no bearing on its status as either friendly or hostile.
From page 8:
Sea zones are either friendly or hostile. Friendly sea zones contain no surface warships (this doesn’t include
submarines and transports) belonging to a power with which you are at war. Hostile sea zones contain surface
warships belonging to a power with which you are at war. (The presence of a surface warship belonging to an enemy
power with which you are not yet at war doesn’t make a sea zone hostile). -
@Cow:
You can load units in a hostile seazone if the seazone became hostile only because of your declaration of war on that turnWhere is this from? quote your rules please.
It’s in the Declaring War section of the rules, not the Transport section.
“During your Combat Move phase following the the entry of of into a state of war, your transports that are already in sea zones that have just become hostile may be loaded in those sea zones (but not in other hostile sea zones). Â In effect, transports may be loaded in their initial sea zones for amphibious assaults before war is declared, while the sea zone is still friendly.”
This is from alpha 3, but it is also in the box on the right column on p15 of AAE40 (did not check p40, but I’m sure it’s there).
Also, to answer your other question, “Sea zones are either hostile or friendly.” is on p8 of the same book. Â Hostile is defined as containing surface warships of a power that you are at war with.
Hope that helps!
-
It does help. These are some pretty lame rules to play with, but whatever. There is always TWW.
Only two real strategies I like in global as of right now. the small’s big world strategy (bomb russia with japan and easy take with germany g5 or g6) and the J1 DOW go for pacific victory. Everything else is too slow, it sucks.
If you are going to play a long game, TWW is hands down better, every aspect is just better. This is the problem with global, there are better games out there, unless I can expect lots of action and fighting tooth and nail back and forth for national objectives or race for berlin / moscow there really isn’t a reason to play global.
-
@Cow:
It does help. These are some pretty lame rules to play with, but whatever. There is always TWW.
Only two real strategies I like in global as of right now. the small’s big world strategy (bomb russia with japan and easy take with germany g5 or g6) and the J1 DOW go for pacific victory. Everything else is too slow, it sucks.
If you are going to play a long game, TWW is hands down better, every aspect is just better. This is the problem with global, there are better games out there, unless I can expect lots of action and fighting tooth and nail back and forth for national objectives or race for berlin / moscow there really isn’t a reason to play global.
What is TWW?
-
Total World War, I would guess.
But a search brings up these, and doesn’t look like it would be any of them… :lol:TWW The Wind Waker (Nintendo Zelda video game)
TWW The West Wing (TV show)
TWW Two-Week Wait
TWW Teaming with Wildlife
TWW The War Within (Transformers comics)
TWW Television Wales & West (ITV-1 England)
TWW The Wolf Web (NCSU community website)
TWW That Was Weird
TWW Texan Wire Wheels (Beverly Hills, CA)
TWW Thomas Woodrow Wilson (28th President of the USA)
TWW Tokyo Writers Workshop
TWW The Wood Whisperer (resource)So yeah, Cow, enlighten us. Give us a link to this amazing game you know
-
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/Total-World-War-td5993258.html@Gamerman01:
Give us a link to this amazing game you know
cant give u a link, cause my posts get flagged as spam when I post a link. just search google for triplea total world war and click the first result.
engine wise it is the best map I ve seen so far (played more than 100 maps so far - just saying to give an impression).
large, but not a huge map with unique terrain&bonuses, different tech trees, many buildings which enable different units/abilities, many units with different specializations etc etc. can be seen as hearts of iron (paradox entertainment game) meets axis&allies. also uses 12 side dice instead of 6.just be sure to dl and read the rich manual first, before playing the game.
-
woot first post with link that s not flagged as spam :)
-
According to the rules, when an allied power first attacks a strict neutral, all other strict-neutrals become pro-axis. Does this mean the allies can attack a strict neutral to allow Russia to conquer the new pro-axis and get extra NO bonuses from them in Alpha 3?
When a Major IC with more than 6 damage gets downgraded, does it keep all its damage or does the damage go down to 6? The rules as written seem to suggest all damage is kept.
-
According to the rules, when an allied power first attacks a strict neutral, all other strict-neutrals become pro-axis. Does this mean the allies can attack a strict neutral to allow Russia to conquer the new pro-axis and get extra NO bonuses from them in Alpha 3?
The bonus applies only to territories that begin the game as pro-axis.
@Stoney229:When a Major IC with more than 6 damage gets downgraded, does it keep all its damage or does the damage go down to 6? The rules as written seem to suggest all damage is kept.
all damage above the maximum amount is discarded.
-
Hello mates. Some help here:
Under the latest Global rules, can the USSR upgrade any of its minor ICs to majors?
-
As I understood it, Major ICs could only be built / upgraded on territories worth 3 IPCs or higher.
(So that factory which popped up in the Ukraine is probably illegal, Dutch…)
-
Major ICs can only be built on 3IPC territories that were originally owned by the power building IC. That means the only industrial expansion USSR could make would be to build minor ICs in Rostov, Caucasus, North Ukraine, or originally non-Soviet territories worth $2 or more.
-
Page 24 under unit profiles for complexes -
“Majors can only be placed on a territory with an IPC value of 3 or more”
Russia can never upgrade anything to a major under Alpha 3 rules.
-
Thanks for the feedback. Oops. 8-)
-
You’re welcome! :oops:
I’ll remove my foot from my mouth now. Hopefully by giving the wrong answer and being corrected I’ll remember that rule for awhile… :roll:
Suggested Topics
