Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

@FastHeinz:

Hopefully someone can help me with this, I remember there being a rule that Russia can take control of allied units in Russia, supposed to represent lend lease. Is that just a first edition rule? I can’t seem to find it in the rule book.

What you’re probably thinking about is one one of the optional National Advantages in A&A Revised (2004).  The original A&A Europe (1999) also had this rule.

@Krieghund:

What you’re probably thinking about is one one of the optional National Advantages in A&A Revised (2004).  The original A&A Europe (1999) also had this rule.

Yes a NA for revised game. I use it in my WW2 40 game.

I noticed in the Pacific rules when Japan declares war unprovoked on the US, Britain, or Anzac the US collects 30 bonus IPC’s but I did not see this in the global portion of the political situation rules for the US. Does the US still get this bonus in Global? Sorry if this is a noob question.

@Minotaur:

I noticed in the Pacific rules when Japan declares war unprovoked on the US, Britain, or Anzac the US collects 30 bonus IPC’s but I did not see this in the global portion of the political situation rules for the US. Does the US still get this bonus in Global? Sorry if this is a noob question.

They do not get this bonus in global.  Sorry.

They do not get this bonus in global.  Sorry.

Thanks for letting me know.

Ah ok thanks everyone for clearing that up for me, I remember playing games where that was a rule but I couldnt remember what game.

can Germany blitz through NW Persia if still pro-allied neutral?

Or must they stop?

It can, Karl.
Germany can’t Blitz a Pro Axis; instead it has to stop.

Thanks

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30776.75

You can blitz unfriendly neutrals.  Germany can blitz through NW Persia when it’s pro-Allies

The following situation needs clarification:
A German submarine and a British battleship are sharing a sea zone.  As the UK, I want to attack that submarine with a destroyer and a fighter, but I would prefer to leave the battleship out of the battle so I can retreat it.  However, if I am attacking that submarine, I am forced to use the battleship in the fight, correct?  Or could I move the battleship out first as a combat move?  There is the rule that says that a ship may move away from a hostile sea zone as a combat move, but technically a submarine does not make a sea zone hostile.

In short, I would not be able to send the battleship away, but instead it would have to fight, correct?

@Charles:

…
In short, I would not be able to send the battleship away, but instead it would have to fight, correct?

Indeed, the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Sea Zones”-rules do not apply in your scenario.
So you can only keep your battleship out of the battle by moving it away by a rules-compliant combat move.
That means attack somewhere else or support an amphibious assault somewhere else.
If a combat move is not possible in your scenario, the battleship will join the battle.

HTH :-)

Thanks.  I was quite angry when this happened to me and another player pointed it out.  Then I ended up finding a better move, leaving the submarine behind.  In my case, I wanted to retreat the battleship to a port so I had no alternative but to give up the attack.  Good to know.

@P@nther:

@Charles:

…
In short, I would not be able to send the battleship away, but instead it would have to fight, correct?

Indeed, the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Sea Zones”-rules do not apply in your scenario.
So you can only keep your battleship out of the battle by moving it away by a rules-compliant combat move.
That means attack somewhere else or support an amphibious assault somewhere else.
If a combat move is not possible in your scenario, the battleship will join the battle.

HTH :-)

Hmm, I was assuming that the combat triggered the rule. How annoying!

A Fighter Scramble question has come up in a game I am playing. The sea zone I want to enter is empty, but there is an adjacent enemy territory with an airbase and fighter(s) in it. There is to be no amphibious assault attempted. If a sea zone is empty, is it considered hostile, when it is adjacent to a territory with an enemy airbase and fighter? If it is hostile, then I could only move surface ships in during combat movement, and therefore the fighter could scramble to defend. If the empty sea zone is NOT considered hostile, then my movement of surface ships into the empty zone could only take place during NON-combat movement, and therefore would be unopposed (no scramble).

Is the empty sea zone in this case hostile or non-hostile, and is my logic correct?

@OwenToo:

A Fighter Scramble question has come up in a game I am playing. The sea zone I want to enter is empty, but there is an adjacent enemy territory with an airbase and fighter(s) in it. There is to be no amphibious assault attempted. If a sea zone is empty, is it considered hostile, when it is adjacent to a territory with an enemy airbase and fighter? If it is hostile, then I could only move surface ships in during combat movement, and therefore the fighter could scramble to defend. If the empty sea zone is NOT considered hostile, then my movement of surface ships into the empty zone could only take place during NON-combat movement, and therefore would be unopposed (no scramble).

Is the empty sea zone in this case hostile or non-hostile, and is my logic correct?

That sea zone is not hostile because there are no enemy surface warships in it.  The enemy fighter and airbase would only come into play (given that the sea zone is empty) if you were attempting an amphibious assault from that sea zone (even if to a different territory than the fighter/airbase territory)

Your movement of surface ships into the empty zone could only take place during non-combat movement and therefore would be unopposed

We-ll, actually it could take place during the combat movement, if you were moving to escape a hostile sea zone, but even then the fighters at the airbase would not be a factor because you are not going to conduct combat in that sea zone or make an amphibious assault.

Transport question!

2 subs attack a seazone that holds a destroyer and a transport.  Planes scramble to help defend.

Both subs hit on their first roll.  Both subs are sunk on first roll.

Is the transport sunk or not?

@weddingsinger:

Transport question!

2 subs attack a seazone that holds a destroyer and a transport.  Planes scramble to help defend.

Both subs hit on their first roll.  Both subs are sunk on first roll.

Is the transport sunk or not?

Yes, it certainly is

A question regarding the impact of subs. Before declaring war, Germany moves its transport and cruiser to 115 (next to Leningrad) and lands units in Finland. What happens, if on R1 the Soviet cruiser moves to 114 and leaves the sub in 115. If war is declared on G2, Germany can ignore the sub but will it have a noncombat movement after (since in a sense, the cruiser and transport ended combat movement in a hostile zone). I’m wondering essentially if the move prevents the Germans from getting the transport back to the safety of 113 and if, in ignoring the sub on the combat move, the German cruiser  and transport are considered to have exhausted their non combat movement?

@farmboy:

A question regarding the impact of subs. Before declaring war, Germany moves its transport and cruiser to 115 (next to Leningrad) and lands units in Finland. What happens, if on R1 the Soviet cruiser moves to 114 and leaves the sub in 115. If war is declared on G2, Germany can ignore the sub but will it have a noncombat movement after (since in a sense, the cruiser and transport ended combat movement in a hostile zone). I’m wondering essentially if the move prevents the Germans from getting the transport back to the safety of 113 and if, in ignoring the sub on the combat move, the German cruiser  and transport are considered to have exhausted their non combat movement?

I can’t see why the ships would lose their non combat movement. However, they are only able to do anything if the cruiser is sunk.

This moves seems only really any good if a DD is purchased G2, or the BB can reach 113. Otherwise, the Soviets will just use their sub to sink the transport.