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

@Charles:

Namely, if an attacking surprise strike scores a hit and the defender chooses a submarine for the casualty, can that defending submarine still get a surprise strike shot that turn or is it destroyed immediately?

Just think of the attacking and defending submarine firing their surprise strikes at the same time.
So yes, the defending submarine gets its shot.

Find the backing up rule in the Pacific rulebook, page 18:

Attacking and defending units in each space are
considered to fire at the same time, but for ease of play you roll
dice in sequence: attacker first, then defender.

The problem arises in the section that says something like “For each hit [surprise strike] the defender removes one unit from play.”  Literally following the rules would require rolling for a submarine that has already been returned to its tray.

@Charles:

The problem arises in the section that says something like “For each hit [surprise strike] the defender removes one unit from play.”  Literally following the rules would require rolling for a submarine that has already been returned to its tray.

Not really. The surprise-strike rules say:

@rulebook:

Each attacking submarine conducting a Surprise Strike rolls one
die. Attacking submarines that roll a ‘2’ or less score a hit. After
the attacking player has rolled for all attacking submarines, the
defender chooses 1 sea unit (submarines can’t hit air units) for
each hit scored and moves it behind the casualty strip. (Note:
undamaged capital ships that are hit only once are not removed.)

Then each defending submarine conducting a Surprise Strike
rolls one die. Defending submarines that roll a ‘1’ score a
hit. After the defending player has rolled for all defending
submarines, the attacker chooses 1 sea unit for each hit scored
and removes it from play. (Note: undamaged capital ships that
are hit only once are not removed.)

…

Once all attacking and defending submarines that conducted a
Surprise Strike have fired, the casualties they have generated
are removed from the game and this step (step 2) is over for
this round of combat. As long as there are attacking and/or
defending submarines and no opposing destroyers, this step is
repeated during each round of combat. Any hits made during
this step that don’t destroy units (such as battleships and
carriers) remain in effect until they are repaired.

HTH :-)

Clarification please on French territories once Paris has fallen.

Once Paris has fallen, France does not collect income from that point forward. But for French colonial territories, who controls the income when an Ally marches through?  In Indo China, and Indonesia Britain or an ally can claim the IPCs by simply placing a friendly land unit there. Is this also true for French Africa?

Once Paris has fallen, if Britain lands troops in Morocco beginning the long march to Libya, does the British player scope up those IPCs along the way like he can in Indo China?  We’ve never played like that in our other games, but have in our last one. We tried to look for clarification in the rules but have not seen anything obvious.

Actually, all French territories are treated the same.  French Indo-China does not get any special treatment other than that Japan is nearby and can take it.

In order for an Allied power to take control of a French territory, an Axis power must first take control.  If you move into a French territory with noncombat, you do not gain control or add the IPC value to your income.  You may only seize a French territory if the Axis take it first.  The same is true of all powers who have lost their capital.  For example, if Rome falls, Germany cannot just walk into Northern Italy and take it.  However, if the Allies conquer an Italian territory (and Rome has fallen) Germany can take it and use its factory, build facilities, or collect IPCs from it.

If you were to liberate Paris, all territories which the Allies had seized from France (because an Axis power overran them and then the Allies counterattacked) return to France.

@P@nther:

@simon33:

You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.

What is weird about this? It is a core principle - not only of this game - that allied territories are friendly.

It seems self evidently weird that when not at war in the Pacific, USA can be treated as though it is at war just because it is at war on the other side of the world.

@simon33:

@P@nther:

@simon33:

You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.

What is weird about this? It is a core principle - not only of this game - that allied territories are friendly.

It seems self evidently weird that when not at war in the Pacific, USA can be treated as though it is at war just because it is at war on the other side of the world.

I actually I find it wierder that the US can be at war in both theaters, Russia is at war with Germany but is not at war Japan and if a US bomber lands in Russia it can not advance onto any pacific map russian territory until ruissia is at war with Japan.  Its like a big invisible wall is there.  Is that Trumps wall or maybe its the Dome! :-D

@simon33:

@P@nther:

@simon33:

You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.

What is weird about this? It is a core principle - not only of this game - that allied territories are friendly.

It seems self evidently weird that when not at war in the Pacific, USA can be treated as though it is at war just because it is at war on the other side of the world.

Once USA is at war it is treated like any other power being at war. It is only Russia that is special.
The special treatment of Russia - according to the rulebook - is based on "Due to its separate treaties with Germany and Japan, the Soviet Union is in a unique position in its relationship with the Axis powers. As a result … "
There is not any corresponding background for the USA in the rules that justifies another peculiarity.

However, I understand what you mean, now.

Are the Submarine warfare rules in Anniversary Edition the exact same as 1940 Global 2nd Edition?

@Young:

Are the Submarine warfare rules in Anniversary Edition the exact same as 1940 Global 2nd Edition?

The only difference I quickly recall is that this Global 1940.2 rule

@rules:

However, a transport is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy submarines unless at
least 1 warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.

is not present in Anniversary.

UK attacks Iraq but fails to take it.  It is an activated axis territory.  Axis planes can land there correct?

I think the axis still has to put a land troop there in order to take control, so that means it would still be neutral.

@variance:

UK attacks Iraq but fails to take it.  It is an activated axis territory.  Axis planes can land there correct?

This is correct. When a pro-Axis neutral is attacked by an Allied power and the attack fails, the pro-Axis neutral joins the Axis. Axis powers can now land planes in the formerly pro-Axis neutral territory.

At this point the formerly-neutral Axis power is not controlled by any other Axis power. When one of the big three Axis powers moves a land unit into the territory, control of the territory goes to that Axis power and any remaining troops of the formerly neutral Axis power become troops of the occupying power.

This is typically seen in the Middle East, when the UK does a preparatory strafe of Iraq to weaken it so that Russia can easily take it without significant losses. In the interim though, Italy and/or Germany could land planes there if the planes were within range and the Axis chose to do so.

Marsh

@GeneralHandGrenade:

I think the axis still has to put a land troop there in order to take control, so that means it would still be neutral.

This is incorrect. See my previous reply to the topic for a full explanation.

Marsh

Thanks guys.  I was 99.9% sure this was correct but triplea doesn’t allow it. It is an oversight in the program but I just wanted to make certain before I roll a bunch of dice for an attack that needs the landing spot.

I will temporarily edit the territory to German and do my move then edit it back to pro-axis once the planes are landed.

Thanks

@variance:

Thanks guys.  I was 99.9% sure this was correct but triplea doesn’t allow it. It is an oversight in the program but I just wanted to make certain before I roll a bunch of dice for an attack that needs the landing spot.

Indeed, TripleA does not follow this rule. Actually this issue is mentioned in the TripleA-Global-Map game notes:

Rules specific to 1940 the engine does not do, but you must follow:
…
(PE) You may not land air units in Friendly Neutrals, including the same turn they are captured, unless they have been previously attacked.
…

cool, thanks Panther

Can USA land planes and ground units in Russian territories on the pacific map when Russia is not at war with Japan? Does Russia need to declare war on Japan if I want American bombers to land in Siberia after hitting Japan?

@KGrimB:

Can USA land planes and ground units in Russian territories on the pacific map when Russia is not at war with Japan? Does Russia need to declare war on Japan if I want American bombers to land in Siberia after hitting Japan?

No. USSR needs to be at war with Japan. USSR has a special rule.

Yes Russia has to declare war on Japan so that USA bombers can land in East Russia (Siberia)