@nebnworb yea they get the bit in their mouth and they can run all over the place. Little annoying things that if they don’t react and you can support, can really be irritating. Of course they can kinda do the same thing, depending on USA strategy : )
Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)
-
You can do both things. Doing a combat doesn’t block a pick up; only the SZ being hostile blocks it.
-
Gamerman,
I would like you to opine on this.
While Japan is not at war with USA, it canNOT park its fleet in the hawaii sz, because that is two spaces away from the US mainland? Correct?
Thank you.
-
While Japan is not at war with USA, it canNOT park its fleet in the hawaii sz, because that is two spaces away from the US mainland? Correct?
This is not correct. SZ 26 is three sea zones away from Western United States and Alaska.
Rulebook says: “Japan may not end the movement of its sea units within 2 sea zones of the United States’ mainland
territories (Western United States and Alaska).” -
Krieghund recently said SZ26 was fine, regularkid.
-
Assuming a 2nd edition game where Japan did not declare on Allies J1 and parked some naval units in sz 36. If United Kingdom declares on Japan UK1, is it legal for UK to land fighters in French Indochina (after attacking sz36)? Is it legal for UK to move units into Fico before or after a declaration, or do France and Japan need to be at war first?
Its tricky to define what sort of “neutral” France is in the Pacific theater. Unlike Anzac and/or Holland, France doesn’t automatically go to war with Japan when United Kingdom declares.
-
Assuming a 2nd edition game where Japan did not declare on Allies J1 and parked some naval units in sz 36. If United Kingdom declares on Japan UK1, is it legal for UK to land fighters in French Indochina (after attacking sz36)? Is it legal for UK to move units into Fico before or after a declaration, or do France and Japan need to be at war first?
Its tricky to define what sort of “neutral” France is in the Pacific theater. Unlike Anzac and/or Holland, France doesn’t automatically go to war with Japan when United Kingdom declares.
France cannot be neutral, as it starts the game as Ally (allied with UK) being already at war. It is simply not at war with Japan.
So UK may of course move units into allied French territories.We had a similar discussion in another thread, which might be interesting for you in this context, starting from here:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41162.msg1724255#msg1724255HTH :-)
-
@P@nther:
Assuming a 2nd edition game where Japan did not declare on Allies J1 and parked some naval units in sz 36. If United Kingdom declares on Japan UK1, is it legal for UK to land fighters in French Indochina (after attacking sz36)? Is it legal for UK to move units into Fico before or after a declaration, or do France and Japan need to be at war first?
Its tricky to define what sort of “neutral” France is in the Pacific theater. Unlike Anzac and/or Holland, France doesn’t automatically go to war with Japan when United Kingdom declares.
France cannot be neutral, as it starts the game as Ally (allied with UK) being already at war. It is simply not at war with Japan.
So UK may of course move units into allied French territories.We had a similar discussion in another thread, which might be interesting for you in this context, starting from here:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41162.msg1724255#msg1724255HTH :-)
Very good. I figured if I was wrong on this one then it’s a very serious TripleA bug that needs fixing right away.
Superficially, there seems to be some logical inconsistencies here though. For example, if Russia isn’t at war with Germany (but is at war with Japan, and thus allied with UK on that front) it’s considered illegal for UK to land fighters/bombers in Russia on the Europe side of the board.
But I guess the difference here is that UK can move units into French Indochina before or after war with Japan is declared.
-
Superficially, there seems to be some logical inconsistencies here though. For example, if Russia isn’t at war with Germany (but is at war with Japan, and thus allied with UK on that front) it’s considered illegal for UK to land fighters/bombers in Russia on the Europe side of the board.
Indeed, Russia is special, that is why it has differentiated rules for neutrality.
But I guess the difference here is that UK can move units into French Indochina before or after war with Japan is declared.
The difference is that “neutral rules” simply do not apply to your scenario, as French territories are friendly to UK units right from the beginning of the game.
-
You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.
-
Sub Q clarification:
Attacker 2x SS,1x CR
Defender 2x DD, 1x SSThe defending sub gets to shoot first, bc a Def DD is present. Correct?
-
Yes. Either that , or it can submerge.
-
You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.
What is weird about this? It is a core principle - not only of this game - that allied territories are friendly.
-
@aequitas:
…
The defending sub gets to shoot first, bc a Def DD is present. Correct?Yes, because the defending destroyer cancels the attacking sub’s surprise strike ability.
-
A fellow player brought up a good point about something we take for granted that is a little vague in the rulebooks: subs vs subs (with surprise strike and usually mixed in with other units but not destroyers).
Namely, if an attacking surprise strike scores a hit and the defender chooses a submarine for the casualty, can that defending submarine still get a surprise strike shot that turn or is it destroyed immediately?
I searched the rulebook and could really find nothing to back up a correct answer.
-
@Charles:
Namely, if an attacking surprise strike scores a hit and the defender chooses a submarine for the casualty, can that defending submarine still get a surprise strike shot that turn or is it destroyed immediately?
Just think of the attacking and defending submarine firing their surprise strikes at the same time.
So yes, the defending submarine gets its shot.Find the backing up rule in the Pacific rulebook, page 18:
Attacking and defending units in each space are
considered to fire at the same time, but for ease of play you roll
dice in sequence: attacker first, then defender. -
The problem arises in the section that says something like “For each hit [surprise strike] the defender removes one unit from play.” Literally following the rules would require rolling for a submarine that has already been returned to its tray.
-
@Charles:
The problem arises in the section that says something like “For each hit [surprise strike] the defender removes one unit from play.” Literally following the rules would require rolling for a submarine that has already been returned to its tray.
Not really. The surprise-strike rules say:
@rulebook:
Each attacking submarine conducting a Surprise Strike rolls one
die. Attacking submarines that roll a ‘2’ or less score a hit. After
the attacking player has rolled for all attacking submarines, the
defender chooses 1 sea unit (submarines can’t hit air units) for
each hit scored and moves it behind the casualty strip. (Note:
undamaged capital ships that are hit only once are not removed.)Then each defending submarine conducting a Surprise Strike
rolls one die. Defending submarines that roll a ‘1’ score a
hit. After the defending player has rolled for all defending
submarines, the attacker chooses 1 sea unit for each hit scored
and removes it from play. (Note: undamaged capital ships that
are hit only once are not removed.)…
Once all attacking and defending submarines that conducted a
Surprise Strike have fired, the casualties they have generated
are removed from the game and this step (step 2) is over for
this round of combat. As long as there are attacking and/or
defending submarines and no opposing destroyers, this step is
repeated during each round of combat. Any hits made during
this step that don’t destroy units (such as battleships and
carriers) remain in effect until they are repaired.HTH :-)
-
Clarification please on French territories once Paris has fallen.
Once Paris has fallen, France does not collect income from that point forward. But for French colonial territories, who controls the income when an Ally marches through? In Indo China, and Indonesia Britain or an ally can claim the IPCs by simply placing a friendly land unit there. Is this also true for French Africa?
Once Paris has fallen, if Britain lands troops in Morocco beginning the long march to Libya, does the British player scope up those IPCs along the way like he can in Indo China? We’ve never played like that in our other games, but have in our last one. We tried to look for clarification in the rules but have not seen anything obvious.
-
Actually, all French territories are treated the same. French Indo-China does not get any special treatment other than that Japan is nearby and can take it.
In order for an Allied power to take control of a French territory, an Axis power must first take control. If you move into a French territory with noncombat, you do not gain control or add the IPC value to your income. You may only seize a French territory if the Axis take it first. The same is true of all powers who have lost their capital. For example, if Rome falls, Germany cannot just walk into Northern Italy and take it. However, if the Allies conquer an Italian territory (and Rome has fallen) Germany can take it and use its factory, build facilities, or collect IPCs from it.
If you were to liberate Paris, all territories which the Allies had seized from France (because an Axis power overran them and then the Allies counterattacked) return to France.
-
@P@nther:
You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.
What is weird about this? It is a core principle - not only of this game - that allied territories are friendly.
It seems self evidently weird that when not at war in the Pacific, USA can be treated as though it is at war just because it is at war on the other side of the world.
Suggested Topics
