AAG40 FAQ

@Cmdr:

@Mallery29:

@Cmdr:

@Odonis:

The unlikely part of this scenario, Jenn, is that Germany would run into a wall of 15-18 Russian Infantry along the way. Not much opportunity to blitz…

Hmm, yes, if Germany decided to go from west to east over Mongolia.��  I was thinking more in tandem with a Japanese push through China.��  More of an “after the fact” move.��  Japan takes China and Germany drives through to Manchuria and then up and over.��Â

Not saying this is a good move, but it’s got a certain psychological impact on an opponent, at least the first time s/he sees it.

Considering most people stagger instead of stack, I could see where Jen is making her point, especially if you use the Japan AF to blow away 6-7 inf in one attack.�Â

You could use the air force for that, and I do that quite often on Indian or Chinese stacks (as strategically necessary, of course) but I am thinking more of running your tanks into China.Â

Course, I didnt think of clearing the Russians out with the Air force.  Even with that idea, I’d say China is better, otherwise, you drag Russian infantry back to the east (which maybe is what you want?)

I think by the time your Germans get out there, the Chinese should be crippled as it is.

@Krieghund:

Of course the Soviet units die - they are cargo.  Germany need not declare war on the USSR in order to attack UK ships.  The Soviets take their chances when they board a ship that’s in danger of being sunk by an enemy.

@Gamerman01:

The Russians can wail on the German carrier and displace the Italian fighters, and the Italian fighters (very oddly) will just fly around watching.  Then they have one space to land, and in the Med they would usually have a safe place to land.

Ok, thanks zane and Gamerman, I guess it settles it. The planes certainly (I believe now) have to take off prior to combat, even though they do not take part in it. Great, now solve this one:

Japan attacks the Soviet Union early and they respond by sending off planes to a British carrier off the coast of India (the Brits are also at war with Japan one way or the other). They can get there in two turns. British captain then decides to steam towards Egypt, oblivious to the fact that the Euro Axis are still honoring the non-aggression deal with Stalin. The Brits are thus ferrying the Soviets who should not be there in the first place (totally neutral on that half of the world). If a Euro Axis power attacks that British convoy, the Soviets are in a quandary: if they take off (and it seems they must), they can never return, even if the carrier survives intact! “Frightfully sorry lads, your ticket expired half the way across from Bombay.” Their only hope is a slim chance of finding a piece of Russian soil (or a carrier!) nearby…

Is the British player even allowed to do this, take the Red air force to the no-hope zone, without their approval?

A)  England may go to war with Japan any time they bloody well feel like it!  Stupid Japanese…with they would go SODDING off!!  (okay, that’s all my british metaphors, think I got em all anyway…)

B)  Interesting scenario.  Not really sure I’d ever get to that point, since technically,
1)  I’d be abandoning Russia to the Germans, the only strafing equipment they have are the two fights and tactical bomber
2)  I’d have to fly the darn things towards Japan which would telegraph my attack plan
3)  I’d have to abandon India to build the sodding carrier, no?  I guess not, I guess I could in theory retreat from the Med or build one off the coast of S. Africa…

Hmm…now UI wanna do a KJF!

@EasyGoing:

The Brits are thus ferrying the Soviets who should not be there in the first place (totally neutral on that half of the world).

This came up before and I believe they ruled that a British carrier loaded with Soviet planes on the Pacific map isn’t allowed to move onto the Europe map until the Soviet planes leave the carrier or Soviets at war in Europe.  So this situation can’t occur.

The original example might have been Soviet infantry on a UK transport crossing the map boundary, but the principle is the same.

If italy DoW on russia and takes a russian territory, is it possible for germany to non-com into that new italian terr. with out being at war with russia himself?  Or is it when italy DoW on russia, germany is automatically at war with russia aswell?

@ghr2:

If italy DoW on russia and takes a russian territory, is it possible for germany to non-com into that new italian terr. with out being at war with russia himself?  Or is it when italy DoW on russia, germany is automatically at war with russia aswell?

Germany can reinforce Italian territories regardless of who originally controlled that territory.  Germany does not need to be at war with the original owner.

I would still like krieg’s opinion though.

Kcdzim is (as nearly always) correct.

@Krieghund:

Kcdzim is (as nearly always) correct.

thanks for the caveat! ;)

Please clarify the US NO’s “• 5 IPCs for each turn that the US has at least one land unit in the territory “France”. Theme: Great Alliance collaboration”
For example, if France is liberated by US and axis takes France back after two turns and axis keeps France for the remaining game.
Will US get 10 IPC each turn the rest of the game from this NO? (2 turn in France x 5 IPC = 10 IPC)

I forgot the rules for global. I got a lone transport he got a lone sub, I can’t amphib assault right? I can ship men non combat though right? If I have an escort I can ignore the sub? do fighters count?

Question : Can a mech paired with a tank move into unoccupied enemy territory, then move into another unoccupied enemy territory w/out the tank? Or, does the mech and tank have to be paired the whole time for the mech to blitz into two different unoccupied enemy territories?

You are right. If you scramble 1 fighter he has to sink your Subs and he cannot do that with any Air units if he did not bring along a DD. Thisscenario came up recently. Is a good defensive ploy.
Lesson: (for the attacker) buy Destroyers if you are serious about Amphibious landings!

Does uk and anzac dow on japan seperately should they declare on japan?

Say uk DOWs japan. when anzac’s turn comes does he have to dow japan or is he already at war? In otherwords if a lone destroyer from japan is at java which is owned by anzac sharing a seazone with a transport… If anzac is not yet at war he could pick up an infantry and take celebes, if he is already at war he cannot do this as per hostile sea zone rules.

Krieg,

I have a question about UK/ANZAC politics.

I am under the assumption that because the “politics hasn’t changes from the box rules”, and because the box rules for Pacific with the errata state that ANZAC/UK are “one” for the purpose of politics, that the following are true:

1. Japan can not declare war on UK and not ANZAC, or ANZAC and not UK.  If Japan wants to declare war, it must be on both of them.

2. UK, if it declares war on Japan, causes ANZAC to go to war with Japan too, right there and then.  (ie: ANZAC is already at war with Japan before anzac’s turn starts)

3. If ANZAC declares war on Japan, it causes UK to go to war with Japan too, right there and then.  (ie: UK is already at war with Japan before uk’s turn starts)

4. If UK declares war on Japan, during ANZAC’s turn ANZAC may not load transports in hostile sea zones, because the war was declared during UK’s turn, not ANZAC’s turn.

Please let me know if these are true,

thx,
veqryn

here is the relevant texts:

Global 3 doc:
A declaration of war by Japan against either the United Kingdom or ANZAC will immediately result in a state of war between Japan and both of those powers.

Pacific errata:
The United Kingdom and ANZAC have a special relationship, and they are treated as one for political purposes. Either power is free to declare war on Japan at the beginning of the Combat Move phase of any of its turns, resulting in a state of war between both powers and Japan.