AAG40 FAQ

@Gamerman01:

@Young:

A fighter’s only legal landing spot after combat is an aircraft carrier which is involved in its own separate sea battle. Even if it’s obvious that the carrier won’t survive, can the fighter still fly its mission or is it viewed as a suicide run?

Not a suicide run - that is legal.

If all your dice are hits and all theirs are misses, the carrier would be available to pick up the fighter (assuming the spot of the combat is within range of the fighter(s) in question)

It depends: if you’re playing 1940, no: the carrier has no attack rolls. So therefore no rolls mean no hits mean no chance to clear. If you’re playing a version where carriers can attack, then yes.

OK: Here’s a question: Assume Russia is at war in Europe but not Pacific. They move in to defend Persia from Italy, aided by a UK stack. Japan sees this UK stack and moves their India stack in to attack. The Russians stay there. The Japanese attack.

1. Can Japan attack if they don’t declare war on Russia?
2. Can Russia fight without declaring war?
3. What happens to the Russians if Japan wins?

@techroll42:

OK: Here’s a question: Assume Russia is at war in Europe but not Pacific. They move in to defend Persia from Italy, aided by a UK stack. Japan sees this UK stack and moves their India stack in to attack. The Russians stay there. The Japanese attack.

1. Can Japan attack if they don’t declare war on Russia?
2. Can Russia fight without declaring war?
3. What happens to the Russians if Japan wins?

You cannot attack a territory if you aren’t at war with each and every power in a territory.  In your example, Japan MUST declare war on Russia prior to their combat move against any territory containing Russian units.

Seazones are not the same as territories - one does not “control” a seazone (you occupy), as such there can be split attacks ignoring nations you’re not at war with.  But that’s a seazone, NOT a territory.

So 1 Russian inf. can essentially save a UK stack if Japan doesn’t want to declare war?

@techroll42:

So 1 Russian inf. can essentially save a UK stack if Japan doesn’t want to declare war?

Yes, but unless the US is ready and waiting to use “Vladivostok” as a staging area, there’s no rule and few reasons that would discourage this as persia doesn’t exactly border a mongolian neutral :)

Also, as Russia can declare war on Japan at any time (and not bother with any combat move - just declare war) just to open up that front, if the Allies wanted joint forces in Amur, they’d already have had them.

There’s actually no reason for Russia, besides “manners” and historic affection, to not declare war turn 1 to open their territories up for potential US bomber landing spaces, British reinforcements, Ruskies through china, etc etc.  The only thing they can’t do without cancelling the mongolian neutrality rule is attack Manchuria.  But they can be at war and not perform an attack, and since there’s no rule that doesn’t punish that aggression, there’s no reason not to do so.  What’s Japan going to do?  Attack Russia?  doesn’t change anything.

@Veqryn:

@Veqryn:

@Krieghund:

@Veqryn:

@Veqryn:

three questions:

1. In OOB I understand Kamikaze attacks perfectly. � However, I want to ask if there was any change to them for the latest Alpha +3?
I am asking because from reading Alpha +3, it really sounds like Japan can make kamikaze attacks from the very start of the game, since the sheet mentions nothing about any conditions necessary to do the attacks (ie: having to wait for the allies to capture one of those ~4 islands).

2. I do not understand the Japan - Russian relationship, in either OOB or Alpha+3.
Does it work like this: Either Japan or Russia can declare war on each other, any time they want [beginning of combat move], from the start of the game?
Besides the weird mongolian rules, that relationship has no effect on anything else….

3. Is Mongolia part of the “Strict Neutrals”?�  I mean, if the axis attack Sweden or another strict neutral, do the mongolians become friendly to the Allies?�  If the allies attack mongolia, does Sweden then become friendly to the axis?
And if Russia attacks a Japanese territory, like Manchuria, that borders Mongolia, and then Japan recaptures it, does Mongolia still convert to Russian?

thx
veqryn

Krieg, any idea?

Gamerman01 and kcdzim answered these questions on the previous page.  Is there something they didn’t cover to your satisfaction?

1.  Kamikaze requirements changed between OOB and Alpha3.  There is no Allied capture of certain islands requirement anymore (Alpha2?)

2.  Basically in OOB Russia or Japan can declare war on the other whenever they want at no penalty.  Later a penalty of 12 IPC’s was added to Russia if Japan attacked Russia (I think it was).  Now that’s gone and the weird Mongolian rules reign.  I stopped keeping track as soon as the weird Mongolian rules were introduced.  (I mean, really)

3.
Soviet/Japanese Non Aggression Pact: Due to their mutual border conflct with Japan in 1939, the Soviet Union and Mongolia have a special relationship. If the Japanese attack any Soviet territory that is adjacent to any Mongolian territory, all Mongolian territories (Olgiy, Dzavhan, Tsagaan-Olom, Central Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, and Buyant-Uhaa) that are still neutral are placed under the control of the Soviet Union at the end of the Japanese Combat Move phase, in the same manner as though the Soviet Union had moved land units into a friendly neutral territory. These territories have Soviet control markers placed on them, and their standing army units are placed on the board and are controlled by the Soviet Union player from then on. This occurs regardless of the state of relations between the Soviet Union and Japan at the time of the attack, with one exception: If the Soviet Union attacks any Japanese-controlled territory bordering these Mongolian territories while Mongolia is still neutral, Mongolia will remain neutral and not ally itself with the Soviet Union. In addition, the Mongolian territories will never become pro-Axis unless one or more of them is attacked by the Soviet Union.

Based on my reading of the current rules per the above Alpha 3 section on this:

A: If Axis attacks Strict Neutral (eg Sweden), Mongolia will go Pro Allied.
B: If Allies attack Strict Neutral (eg Sweden), Mongolia will remain an isolated Strict Neutral
C: If Axis attacks Mongolia while Mongolia is still Strict Neutral, ALL Strict Neutrals (eg Sweden) will go Pro Allied.

D: If Russia attacks a Japanese controlled territory adjacent to Mongolia, Mongolian territories will never ally themselves with Russia and remain an isolated strict neutral. This means that if Russia attacks Manchuria, Japan is completely free to respond and will NEVER anger the Mongolians unless Japan attacks mongolia directly. (hope for this).

E: If Japan attacks a russian territory adjacent to Mongolia, but not a Mongolian territory, Mongolia lights up as Russian, activates all her infantry, and becomes russian controlled.  But if Japan attacks a russian territory AND mongolia during the same combat move phase, Mongolia is still a strict neutral and will change alliances of all strict neutrals. (don’t do that ever).

No, just that kcdzim seemed not 100% sure of his answer.
Thx for the clarification, krieg, gamer, kcdzim.

Man these Mongolian rules are just plain nuts….

to be more specific, they are very complicated and do not add anything to the game beyond complexity

Ok, I do need further clarification:

D. Do you mean that if Russia attacks a Japanese controlled Manchuria, that Mongolia stays neutral.  Then if Japan re-conquers Manchuria, Mongolia still stays neutral.  Then the next turn, if Japan conquers Amur, that Mongolia stays neutral still?
Yes.  If Russia attacks Manchuria, Mongolia will NEVER flip to Russian controlled upon Japanese retaliation, anywhere at anytime.

F: If British or a non-Russian country attacks Sweden (strict neutral), then Mongolia will stay as neutral.  Then if Japan attacks Amur next turn, Mongolia will become Russian still?  Or stay as Neutral?
If any ally, including Russia, attacks Sweden (or any euro strict neutral), Mongolia will remain neutral.  However, if Japan attacks Amur the next turn, Mongolia will flip at the end of Japan’s combat move phase.  In this current rule set, It’s kind of a diplomatic one way street on the allied side.  If someone attacks Mongolia while it’s a strict neutral, it will flip every strict neutral on the european board.  But if the allies attacks a european neutral, it does nothing to the Pacific neutrals.  However, if the axis attack a strict neutral on the euro side, Mongolia will switch to pro ally.

thx,
veqryn

lol, sorry to bring this up one more time,

G. If Russia attacks Mongolia, do the European Strict Neutrals become Pro-Axis?

H. If a non-Russian Allied power, like the UK, attacks Mongolia, does mongolia become Pro-Axis, and does the European Strict Neutrals become Pro-Axis?

thx,
veq

G.  Yes.

H.  No, and yes.

Question Re: Scramble

When an enemy conducts amphibious assault into your province that neighbors another of your provinces with an airbase you can scramble against the invasion fleet.

Can the attacker dedicate air units or other sea units like aircraft carriers and destroyers to the sea zone of the amphibious invasion to ward off the scramble even though their movement would not result in a combat situation?  I think the movement rules are explicitly clear on this:

“However, units can’t end their movement in friendly spaces during combat… except units that will be participating in an amphibious assault…”

Air units, destroyers, and aircraft carriers not in the amphibious assault would violate that rule I think.

Ruling?

I ask because I got on the wrong side of this as Germany trying to invade Leningrad by sea and all I have were transports, a destroyer and a carrier. The russian player said he’d just scrambe and that my cv’s, dd and any air units could not be moved into the sea zoen in anticipation of a scramble.

I see what you are saying, but it still goes against the explicit letter of the rules. Â

The moving player’s units must be in a combat situtation, and moving in anticipation of a scramble is not listed as an exception to that dictum.  I would tend to agree with you but for the fact exceptions were listed and this one was not stated.

Has there been a clarifcation by Krieghund on this?

Â

This situation is addressed in the Official Rules Clarifications.

Got it!

Sorry I doubted you Gamerman01!  :-D

Alpha 2 rules question.

Scenario: Japan has a sub in z6 (sea of Japan), USA wants to amphibious assault Korea. USA sends 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport to z6 no air units are available to scramble. Under a2, we need a warship or the sub prevents the Amphibious assault. If I read it correctly:

“11. Submarines no longer fire a special �sneak attack� shot at unescorted transports. Transports are not allowed to unload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing an enemy sub(s) belonging to a power with which they are at war unless at least one of his warships was also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.”
The warship must be there at the end of the combat move phase.
Kamikaze attacks occur at the beginning of the Combat Phase.
I believe it was mentioned that Kamikaze does not trigger a combat, but it does prevent bombardment. So the Sub will not be activated by a naval battle
Does this mean that if Japan uses a Kamikaze to destroy the CA, that the amphibious assault goes off without a hitch even if the transport is now alone and an enemy sub is present?

Yes.

Is it true that you can load units to a transport and unload them as a amphibious assault in the same turn?

Can you send an aircraft carrier into combat to take hits?

We’ve always played the game that aircraft carriers can’t move during combat movement phase because they have no attack value. But now that we’ve reread the rules, it doesn’t state anywhere that they can’t attack (or take hits).