AAG40 FAQ

@Krieghund:

@Flashman:

If both sides are eliminated the tt has to be marked somehow as “Pro” as there are no defenders indicating which side it’s aligned to.

An upside down control marker works just fine.

@Flashman:

Can such a tt be blitzed through?

Yes, as it’s unoccupied.

Can, a german tank, move of two through Iraq (pro-axis neutral and activate it) and go in North o eastern Persia (Axis controlled)?

@Stefano1189:

@Krieghund:

@Flashman:

If both sides are eliminated the tt has to be marked somehow as “Pro” as there are no defenders indicating which side it’s aligned to.

An upside down control marker works just fine.

@Flashman:

Can such a tt be blitzed through?

Yes, as it’s unoccupied.

Can, a german tank, move of two through Iraq (pro-axis neutral and activate it) and go in North o eastern Persia (Axis controlled)?

I do not believe so. You move into Iraq as a non combat move, taking a pro ally is a combat move. Also I believe moving into a neutral and “activating” it requires the unit “activating” to stop there for the turn.

See page 10, right column, second sentence of second paragraph under the section: “Friendly Neutrals” in the AAEurope1940 rulebook. “They can be moved into (but not through) as a noncombat move by land units of a power that is at war (see Noncombat Move, pg. 21).”

Amphip.  Assault scenario.

Fleet 1:  Destroyer, Cruiser, Transport w/ Inf, Air Carrier w/ 2 planes. 
Fleet 2:  Air Carrier x2 w/ 2 planes on each.

Fleet 1 enters into sea zone w/ enemy ships and conducts sea combat, wins, unloads transports and planes from Air Carrier to land zone.

Fleet 2 moves so that the planes can get to the zone in 4 moves, with one move left to get to the Air Carrier of Fleet 1.

Can the planes from Fleet 2 do this as there is a possibility of them landing on the Air Carrier, or no because there are potentially 6 planes needing to land where there are only 2 known spots?  Or yes they can, but any remaining planes over 2 are removed from the board?

If the carrier in fleet 1 is the only landing spot within range, only 2 planes may attack.

Also, if the planes are attacking the land territory, they must move there during combat movement, before the sea combat is resolved.  They may not participate in both the sea and land battles.  If the sea battle fails, the planes must still attack alone, but may retreat after one round of combat.

Suppose an infantry moves into a Pro neutral and activates it. Can a tank then move 2 spaces through the tt on the same NCM turn?

If not, it might seem bizarre that a hostile tank can move through an unactivated neutral (with no defenders via blitz as above), but a friendly power has to stop there.

Perhaps a friendly tank should be allowed to move through, even if it is the unit activating the neutral.

@Flashman:

Suppose an infantry moves into a Pro neutral and activates it. Can a tank then move 2 spaces through the tt on the same NCM turn?

No.

@Flashman:

If not, it might seem bizarre that a hostile tank can move through an unactivated neutral (with no defenders via blitz as above), but a friendly power has to stop there.

Violence against defenseless enemies yields quicker results than diplomacy with reticent friends.

For Mec Inf to blitz they have to be matched up with an armor.  Is that a one to one deal or can 2 mec inf blitz along with a single arm.

The rules mention pairing but its not crystal clear to me so I just want to check.

Thanks.

@ksmckay:

For Mec Inf to blitz they have to be matched up with an armor.  Is that a one to one deal or can 2 mec inf blitz along with a single arm.

The rules mention pairing but its not crystal clear to me so I just want to check.

Thanks.

I think your gut instinct is correct. One on one pairing.

See page 26, AAEurope1940 rulebook, top of page, left column, second sentence. “A paired tank and mechanized infantry unit that encounters enemy units in the first territory it enters must stop there, even if the unit is an antiaircraft gun, industrial complex, air base, or naval base.” - This is a clear reference to Pairing…although this sentence does not fit your question, it is a clear that pairing applies to Mechanized that wish to blitz as this is found under the “Blitz” section that begins on the bottom right part of page 25.

Edit: See page 14, same rulebook, section “Tanks, Mechanized Infantry, and Blitzing”, second sentence:" In addition, one mechanized infantry unit can move along with each blitzing tank."

Got it.  Missed the reference on page 14.  That’s what I was looking for.  Thanks.

@gamerman01:

@warwinner:

Question Krieg, If you obtain radar, do the benefits transfer over to the air defense of ICs and bases as well, or just the actual AA pieces? In other words, if I’m being strategically bombed, and I have radar, does my anti aircraft hit on a 2? I don’t have the rulebook since it’s a friends game, so that’s why I ask.

From page #37:
4. Radar.  Your antiaircraft fire now hits on a 1 or 2 instead of just a 1.

I know you didn’t have the rulebook, so there it is.  Radar improves ALL antiaircraft fire immediately.  It’s freaking awesome.

Interestingly, this was the first question that popped into my head after reading the rule book, and I would beg to differ.

p.37 under radar doesn’t say:  “Your antiaircraft fire now hits on a 1 or 2 instead of just a 1” as you quoted, it says “Your antiaircraft [GUN] fire now hits on a 1 or 2 instead of just a 1”.

As the AA [GUN] is now a specific piece designed to defend military ground units from air attack rather than a general territory defender, and facilities are listed as having “self-defense antiaircraft ability” rather than “anti-aircraft gun” I think it is open to debate on facility AA hitting on a 1 or 2 with Radar.

Stratigic bombing is already pretty marginal given facility automatic AA fire plus intercepters, a nation that develops Radar would become functionally immune to raiding.  I would argue against granting facility AA radar bonus myself.

It applies to facilities as well.  This will be in the FAQ.

So you’re saying radar shouldn’t help one iota vs. SBR’s?  That would be even worse.  Why would a power be just as vulnerable to raiding bombers before and after getting radar??

I would be OK with it myself, yes.  I’m not talking about the rational of it, I’m talking about the mechanics.  Right now, bombing is a marginal attack.  It can swing any given game, but on the average over the extended life of Axis and Allies it works out to be just worth it for the the attacker.  I feel that Heavy Bombers was the tech counter to Radar, but given it’s current incarnation, isn’t good enough.  Even if I had heavies I wouldn’t fly them into a Radar protected facility.  To answer your Why? then, when a technology effectively eliminates an option to the foe, and the OOB text can be interpreted in what I feel is a logical way that maintains the current slightly-worth-it position of bombing, do you need another reason?

Now, if the game Q & A guy says no, you’re splitting hairs and Radar upgrades all AA fire and that this will be in an errata to the OOB rules, then you are correct in saying that my interpretation will stand as a house rule.  I read the FAQ posted here and I didn’t see, " Krieghund said Radar boosts all facilities as well as AA guns", but given the 35+ number of pages, I accept I could have missed it.  I am going to happly play with Radar upgrading facilities, based on Krieghunds comment, “It applies to facilities as well.  This will be in the FAQ”  It’s a much cleaner rule this way, and alot of Axis rules are deliberately clean.

Just call me blind, but can anyone tell me where in the rules of 1940 Global/Pacific/Europe is stated when subs do emerge again after they’ve submerged?

In the old Pacific and Europe and Revised it’s clearly stated. It’s rather important to know and not to assume when they emerge with the convoy-disruption rules in place.

At the moment we assume they emerge before convoy-disruption right after non-combat movement.

Thanks in advance and kind regards,

K’68

@K0rnput1968:

Just call me blind, but can anyone tell me where in the rules of 1940 Global/Pacific/Europe is stated when subs do emerge again after they’ve submerged?

In the old Pacific and Europe and Revised it’s clearly stated. It’s rather important to know and not to assume when they emerge with the convoy-disruption rules in place.

At the moment we assume they emerge before convoy-disruption right after non-combat movement.

Thanks in advance and kind regards,

K’68

Page 18, AAEurope1940 rulebook, right column, second paragraph below the section: “Step 2: Submarine Surprise Strike or Submerge (Sea Battles Only)”. “Attacking or defending submarines that choose to submerge are removed from the battle strip immediately and placed on the game board in the contested sea zone, removing them from the remaining battle sequence.”

This means that “submerging” simply takes the sub out of combat and places it back on the game board. Subs don’t actually stay “submerged”, it is just an option to leave combat when the enemy has no destroyers to force you to stay.

See also page 29 for the submarine unit description.

This is different from the old versions of the game. This is also not an official answer. Hope it helps.

@JamesAleman:

@K0rnput1968:

Just call me blind, but can anyone tell me where in the rules of 1940 Global/Pacific/Europe is stated when subs do emerge again after they’ve submerged?

In the old Pacific and Europe and Revised it’s clearly stated. It’s rather important to know and not to assume when they emerge with the convoy-disruption rules in place.

At the moment we assume they emerge before convoy-disruption right after non-combat movement.

Thanks in advance and kind regards,

K’68

Page 18, AAEurope1940 rulebook, right column, second paragraph below the section: “Step 2: Submarine Surprise Strike or Submerge (Sea Battles Only)”. “Attacking or defending submarines that choose to submerge are removed from the battle strip immediately and placed on the game board in the contested sea zone, removing them from the remaining battle sequence.”

This means that “submerging” simply takes the sub out of combat and places it back on the game board. Subs don’t actually stay “submerged”, it is just an option to leave combat when the enemy has no destroyers to force you to stay.

See also page 29 for the submarine unit description.

This is different from the old versions of the game. This is also not an official answer. Hope it helps.

Ah, that explains it a little better now, thanks! I was looking in the turn sequence for it. It’s always difficult when you are reading the rules in a foreign language. We are going into our first official match with others this weekend and want to be fully prepped against any form of loopholes in the rules.

Been playing A&A for 24 years now and must say: the rulebooks -unfortunately- don’t get any more transparent with each new release. (Don’t get me wrong, We really love the new global over here and are faithful buyers of each new release. thanks for all those nice hours of gaming fun Larry!)

Question on Russia.  I read the global political situation and it says USSR cannot wage war against a European force until the 4th turn.  It would seem that they can declare war on Japan anytime they wish then, is that correct?