AAG40 FAQ

You can load units in a hostile seazone if the seazone became hostile only because of your declaration of war on that turn

Where 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 turn

Where 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).  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.  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?

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.

@Stoney229:

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.

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:

when one half of UK’s economy purchases a base, does it have to be placed on that economy’s territory, or can it be put on territories that give money to the other economy?
Example: Can London buy a naval base for west India (part of India’s economy)?

@Gamerman01:

Good question because the latest Alpha3 rules (including UK rules in blue) do not address this.

Look at the original rulebook, though:
Page 32, under “Global UK rules”
“…UK units purchased and placed on the Pacific map can only be bought with IPC’s generated on the Pacific map.  Likewise, UK units purchased and placed on the Europe map can only be bought with IPCs generated on the Europe map.”

Seems clear that London can’t buy bases on the Pacific map (except on Yukon or BC) and Calcutta can’t pay for bases on the Europe map (except Western India).  Even if the other capital is down.  Krieghund will say if this is wrong, but I’m 99% sure

yup.  alpha supplements OOB, so if you don’t see something addressed or contradicted by alpha, OOB still governs.

I wondered the same thing….but my evil plan was thwarted :evil: