Well done!
Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)
-
usa has a carrier, a fighter, and a loaded transport in sz112 which contested as germany built a destroyer and sub into sz112 on it’s turn.
usa conducts combat in sz112 and amphibiously assualts western germany.
usa fighter hits which must be taken on the destroyer.
germany destroyer and sub miss.
now it is a usa carrier and fighter vs a sub.what happens at this point?
can usa ignore the sub and amphibiously assault west germany?
can usa retreat to another seazone as they started in sz112?
is the usa forced to keep attacking until the sub sinks the carrier? -
if you can’t kill the sub, i don’t think you can land the men to assault. you can only ignore the sub if it is the only thing in the zone. once the sub is fighting, it has to be killed to land troops.
-
usa has a carrier, a fighter, and a loaded transport in sz112 which contested as germany built a destroyer and sub into sz112 on it’s turn.
usa conducts combat in sz112 and amphibiously assualts western germany.
usa fighter hits which must be taken on the destroyer.
germany destroyer and sub miss.
now it is a usa carrier and fighter vs a sub.what happens at this point?
This is an unwinnable battle for the USA. If the player knew the rules, he wouldn’t attack.
can usa ignore the sub and amphibiously assault west germany?
NO. Subs can only be ignored in the movement phases when there are no surface warships present.
can usa retreat to another seazone as they started in sz112?
NO. I’ve asked Krieghund this before. If the USA wants to retreat, he must establish a retreat route, by moving out of the zone and back in during the combat move. If this is a friendly game, the Axis player would be kind to let the screwed USA player retreat even though he didn’t establish the route, because he didn’t understand the rules.
is the usa forced to keep attacking until the sub sinks the carrier?
YES, technically, because there is no retreating when no retreat route has been established.
Again, the USA player (is it YOU??!) is SCREWED and at the Axis player’s mercy to give him a break.
BIG MISTAKE USA made here -
thank you for the quick answer gamerman.
this is a hypothetical situation to help me with the rules.
the question came about as it is similar to a situation of a game i am playing now.
i have never come across a no option to retreat scenario and could not find anything definitive in the rulebook and wanted clarification. -
Yep - you’re welcome
That’s the right answer…
It’s a no retreat situation when you start in a hostile sea zone and you don’t move out and back in
-
So all you have to do is move out then into the seazone, to get a retreat route?
I have 3 retreat questions that came up last game. 1) can ou retreat from a territory you just attacked and cleared all defenders, without invading it? 2) Can you retreat part of your army? ex, Im attacking with 20 units, after reducing the defenders to 1 single unit i retreat with everything except 2 units, which keep attacking? 3) I’ve read that you can retreat from land battles before the first turn of combat? We ruled that you need at least 1 round of combat before retreating, otherwise why not make every single possible combat move, every turn. Just get rid of the combat move turn, then, like in 1914.
-
Chico answer to all of your question is no
-
So all you have to do is move out then into the seazone, to get a retreat route?
Yes
I have 3 retreat questions that came up last game. 1) can ou retreat from a territory you just attacked and cleared all defenders, without invading it?
I am guessing that when you say “without invading it”, you mean without conquering it. Once you clear all defenders you can not retreat. Also, if you cleared all defenders except AA guns or transports, you can not retreat.
- Can you retreat part of your army? ex, Im attacking with 20 units, after reducing the defenders to 1 single unit i retreat with everything except 2 units, which keep attacking?
No, you can’t do that. You can only do partial retreats in the case of amphibious assaults. You should keep track of which units came off transports and which came overland. You can make ONE retreat of ALL AIR and overland units together. All land units must retreat to one territory that one of the land units came from. The ground units attacking off transports must fight to the death.
- I’ve read that you can retreat from land battles before the first turn of combat? We ruled that you need at least 1 round of combat before retreating, otherwise why not make every single possible combat move, every turn. Just get rid of the combat move turn, then, like in 1914.
What you read is wrong. You can NEVER retreat from ANY kind of battles without rolling any dice - you must always go 1 round. Note however that if you are attacking with sub(s) and there are no enemy destroyers, you could immediately submerge and no dice would be rolled. But even in this case, the sub cannot retreat back to a different zone - it would stay in the same one.
Note also that if you are doing an amphibious assault and you fail to win the naval battle (so you can’t unload any ground units) and IF you are attacking the coastal territory with aircraft, those aircraft are REQUIRED to go 1 round of combat before retreating. -
I am currently in a game and placed a UK sub in SZ 98. After Italy’s turn, Italy received it’s 5PU NO for controlling the Med. The only thing in the Med is a British sub in SZ 98.
Shouldn’t that sub prevent the NO? Even in the game notes (regarding SZ 125), here is what it says: 5 PUs if Russia is at war, sz125 has no Axis warships (all sea units except transports), Archangel is Russia-controlled, and there are no allied units in any originally Russian territories.
For the Med, it states the following: 5 PUs if no Allied ships are in the Med: sz92,…,sz99.
So, from inference, it would appear that even an allied trannie in the Med would negate the NO, let alone a sub, correct? Of course, my core question is regarding the sub.
-
Game notes are not exactly accurate there!
The Med NO has always been Allied SURFACE ships! You need at least 1 destroyer in the Med.
-
Cool, so could we make a request that TripleA reword what the current NO says to state “surface” ships? It’s only a word, but it’s a big one in this instance… :)
-
You can make a request, but Veqryn has brushed off many requests that I have made for corrections, which actually affect game play. For example, requiring amphibious assaults to be conducted before other combat (and SBR’s before amphibious). Also complained that Triple A does not track or enforce Allied fighters on carriers. Veq brushed me off on this too.
Triple A also does not tell you which allied ground units are on which transports. This can be very significant. You have to make manual game notes yourself whenever you have mixed units on carriers/transports, if you are to play the game properly.As you noted, the game actually interprets the rule correctly - it gave Italy the NO when there was a UK sub in the med.
-
Very cool… thanks for the quick responses Gamer! I’m still really a newbie at G40 (obviously lol), but now I know. :)
In any event, it’s just very cool that TripleA exists for us to play so many different games.
I think that Veqryn may be down a programmer from what I saw on a different A&A site, so I bet it’s not all his fault. I just hope they can find someone before too long. (remember, the preceding sentence contains heresay lol)
-
Yep, and as always, you’re welcome
-
2 Questions: Convoy Disruption and UK National Objective
1.) Conduct Convoy Disruption (CCD):
is CCD an option or is it a must do, if warships are present?
Take, for example, Japan has warships in sea zone 54, but wants to conquer “New South Wales” next round, and I do not want to use convoy disruption, to capture all the Anzac IPCs.
Can I decide not to use the convoy disruption in this case when Anzac collects his income, in Triple A there is no option for this?2.) About UK-Pacific NO:
5 PUs if UK Pacific controls both Kwangtung and Malaya, and is at war with Japan.
Need I also to control all the original UK Pacific territories to collect this NO? -
1.) Conduct Convoy Disruption (CCD):
is CCD an option or is it a must do, if warships are present?
Take, for example, Japan has warships in sea zone 54, but wants to conquer “New South Wales” next round, and I do not want to use convoy disruption, to capture all the Anzac IPCs.
Can I decide not to use the convoy disruption in this case when Anzac collects his income, in Triple A there is no option for this?Hi Babubaer,
Convoy Disruption occurs in the Collect Income Phase of the nation that is affected. In your case in the Collect Income Phase of ANZAC.
So if there are Japanese warships in SZ 54 during ANZAC’s Collect Income Phase CCD occurs automatically.
It has nothing to do with Japanese moves during Japanese move phases.
HTH :-) -
2.) About UK-Pacific NO:
5 PUs if UK Pacific controls both Kwangtung and Malaya, and is at war with Japan.
Need I also to control all the original UK Pacific territories to collect this NO?No. The NO is only about Kwangtung and Malaya. Of course Calcutta must be in UK’s hands.
-
Hi P@nther  :-)
first, thxs for your fast answers:
Convoy Disruption occurs in the Collect Income Phase of the nation that is affected. In your case in the Collect Income Phase of ANZAC.
ok that is clear so far.
So if there are Japanese warships in SZ 54 during ANZAC’s Collect Income Phase CCD occurs automatically.
It has nothing to do with Japanese moves during Japanese move phases.
HTH :-)Sorry but i need to ask again, why should i destroy IPC´s when i can capture them on my next turn? I cant find nothing in the rules that that happens automaticly but i can as well nothing find in the rules that it is an Option! I guess you are right P@nther but i would be happy to have a clarification from Krieghund or gamerman.
-
Sorry but i need to ask again, why should i destroy IPC’s when i can capture them on my next turn? I cant find nothing in the rules that that happens automaticly but i can always nothing find in the rules that it is an Option! …
Because it is not on Japan to decide about anything when it comes to ANZAC’s Collect Income Phase.
If you don’t want that to happen as Japan just don’t leave warships in that Convoy Raid zone. You can attack Sydney starting from other seazones without provoking Convoy Raiding in ANZAC’s Collect Income Phase before.
Japan decides to move when it is up to Japan’s decisions: In Japan’s CM or NCM phase. If Japan decides to move into SZ 54 it decides to disrupt convoys in ANZAC’s Collect Income Phase. -
hi P@nther, 8-)
your detailed comments have convinced me absolutly!! :-D :-D
Thxs for your help, maybe you are also such a great rule “Guru” like Krieghund and Gamerman. Have a nice day!
Suggested Topics
