AAG40 FAQ

Ah, gotcha.  Traditional native drink.  Kay, makes more sense to me now!

HI, I’ve joined to clear up a few issues for the Global game.

• may an allied power at war land a plane in a pro-allied neutral territory? For example if it was the only landing spot available to make a move legal?
• may the US land planes in neutral Dutch East Indies?
• if you attack a seazone with planes, and they get destroyed, do you still have to move the carrier to that zone or in range to provide a theoretical landing spot as if the planes were never destroyed?
• if you attack a seazone with a plane, and it would require for a landing place you also clear another seazone (for example, a submarine vs 1000 battleships), and your plane succeeds in winning, but the sub doesn’t defeat the 1000 battleships, must I still move my aircraft carrier into the zone with the hostile battleships to pick up the fighter as it is in fact the only possible landing place? And if not allowed, can I then move the carrier wherever I like, within its range?

Thanks for the japonese Major IC answers. Now i have another doubt.

I attack te italian fleet in SZ96 with a destroyer and the plane from malta and egypt. I win this battle. The sea zone is cleared. In the non combat movement can i move the cruiser and the carrier toward sea zone 94 or 92?

Thanks

@RedArmySoldier:

HI, I’ve joined to clear up a few issues for the Global game.

• may an allied power at war land a plane in a pro-allied neutral territory? For example if it was the only landing spot available to make a move legal?

No.  It’s a neutral territory, not a friendly territory.

@RedArmySoldier:

• may the US land planes in neutral Dutch East Indies?

Holland/Netherlands is not neutral - they are at war with Germany (the government was in exile in London).  Thus, the Dutch East Indies are not neutral territories.  Assuming that the US is not neutral, yes.  As long as the US is at war with someone, they can land in dutch territories.

@RedArmySoldier:

• if you attack a seazone with planes, and they get destroyed, do you still have to move the carrier to that zone or in range to provide a theoretical landing spot as if the planes were never destroyed?

No.

@RedArmySoldier:

• if you attack a seazone with a plane, and it would require for a landing place you also clear another seazone (for example, a submarine vs 1000 battleships), and your plane succeeds in winning, but the sub doesn’t defeat the 1000 battleships, must I still move my aircraft carrier into the zone with the hostile battleships to pick up the fighter as it is in fact the only possible landing place? And if not allowed, can I then move the carrier wherever I like, within its range?

You cannot noncombat move a carrier into a hostile seazone (surface warships make a seazone hostile).  The plane has no legal landing space, so it will die, and the carrier, because it cannot move to save the plane, can move to any other legal space.

@diogom:

Thanks for the japonese Major IC answers. Now i have another doubt.

I attack te italian fleet in SZ96 with a destroyer and the plane from malta and egypt. I win this battle. The sea zone is cleared. In the non combat movement can i move the cruiser and the carrier toward sea zone 94 or 92?

Thanks

Assuming that SZ 94 or SZ 92 are not hostile (no surface enemy warships - subs and transports don’t make a seazone hostile), yes.

@kcdzim:

@diogom:

Thanks for the japonese Major IC answers. Now i have another doubt.

I attack te italian fleet in SZ96 with a destroyer and the plane from malta and egypt. I win this battle. The sea zone is cleared. In the non combat movement can i move the cruiser and the carrier toward sea zone 94 or 92?

Thanks

Assuming that SZ 94 or SZ 92 are not hostile (no surface enemy warships - subs and transports don’t make a seazone hostile), yes.

So in the non combat mov SZ96 is considered friendly because i destroyed all the italian ships in the combat move! That´s right?

@diogom:

@kcdzim:

@diogom:

Thanks for the japonese Major IC answers. Now i have another doubt.

I attack te italian fleet in SZ96 with a destroyer and the plane from malta and egypt. I win this battle. The sea zone is cleared. In the non combat movement can i move the cruiser and the carrier toward sea zone 94 or 92?

Thanks

Assuming that SZ 94 or SZ 92 are not hostile (no surface enemy warships - subs and transports don’t make a seazone hostile), yes.

So in the non combat mov SZ96 is considered friendly because i destroyed all the italian ships in the combat move! That´s right?

Yes, even if all your units that attacked that seazone were destroyed in the process of clearing it during combat.  As long as the seazone is clear of all enemy surface warships at the end of the combat phase, the seazone is friendly during the noncombat phase.

I have a question about scrambling.  If a territory is attacked via amphibious assault and the attacker already had a destroyer or an aircraft carrier in the SZ, if defender scrambles his fighters, who are they fighting exactly?  Is it only the ships involved in the amphibious assault (battleships, cruisers, transports) or are you also required to fight destroyers, subs and carriers that were already in the zone at the start of the turn?

If these ships must participate in the battle, does that prevent them from making a non combat move later in the turn?  It seems strange that you are basically attacked in your own turn, preventing you from controlling your own units.  Alternatively, it would be odd for a non-air unit to be able to fight in a battle and then move in the non combat phase.  Please clear this up for me, my friend and I disagreed on this during a game.  Thanks for the help!

Am I reading this correctly?

In situations where a sea zone is served by more than one airbase, Korea and Japan into sea zone 6 for example, each of the territories (or both in this case) can scramble up to 3 fighters and/or tactical bombers.

So Japan could scramble 3 planes from Korea and 3 planes from Japan for a total of 6 scrambled planes to help defend sea zone 6?

Yes, assuming the Japanese player has built an air base in Korea.

@Tyzoq:

Am I reading this correctly?

In situations where a sea zone is served by more than one airbase, Korea and Japan into sea zone 6 for example, each of the territories (or both in this case) can scramble up to 3 fighters and/or tactical bombers.

So Japan could scramble 3 planes from Korea and 3 planes from Japan for a total of 6 scrambled planes to help defend sea zone 6?

If focusing on Europe for your win, I would HIGHLY recommend buying an airbase for Korea.  You may end up being pushed back and having those extra fighters and your Kami’s really puts a damper on the Allies excitment.

Is there any situation where you’re allowed to build a boat in a hostile sea zone ?

@Axisplaya:

Is there any situation where you’re allowed to build a boat in a hostile sea zone ?

I’m pretty sure you can always build in hostile sea zones (assuming you have an IC, obviously).

tx

Situation:

China got mercilessly beaten in an attack on the Japanese.
England and Japan are not at war.

Question:

Can the Chinese fighter land in Burma without instigating a free declaration by Japan on England? (Free as in the Americans cannot declare war early.)

This is round 1.

i would immediatly assume no, since the uk is not allowed to be allied with china yet anyway. but i would wait for krieg, because he said, something along the lines of: since the uk and anzac start at war in europe, the arent under the restrictions of neutral powers

@Cmdr:

Can the Chinese fighter land in Burma without instigating a free declaration by Japan on England? (Free as in the Americans cannot declare war early.)

This is round 1.

Yes. At any time Tigers (China’s Figter) can land in Burma (or Kwantung for that matter) without causing a Casus Belli. i.e. it’s not an act of war… and, futhermore, Japan has to declare war to UK in order to attack that China’s Plane.

I do, in some situation, escape Tigers that way…