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

@Gamerman01:

Think of it this way.  Fighters must only be guaranteed a possible place to land in the combat movement phase
Once you’re in combat, you are free to strand fighters at will.

Just thought of something.

During combat movement you must be able to demonstrate that all of your plans could possibly land safely.
AFTER combat, you also can’t ditch planes on purpose.
If you can land them safely in the non-combat movement phase, you have to.

If US ground forces in Amur attack Japanese held Manchuria/Korea, will that prevent the Mongolians from being activated as Russian forces?

@captain:

If US ground forces in Amur attack Japanese held Manchuria/Korea, will that prevent the Mongolians from being activated as Russian forces?

America is not Russian.  Unless there have been drastic changes to the rules, and as far as I know there have not, but I do not frequent Larry Harris’ site much anymore, then no, America will not have an impact on Mongolia’s political situation.

I believe, and this is mostly conjecture, the idea behind Mongolia was to incorporate the Russo-Japanese agreements that past versions of the game had - at times - as well as give another route for Japan to invade, should china become a quagmire.  America entering the situation should have a non-effect on the situation for Mongolia.  What do they care if the Imperialistic American Pig-dogs invade Manchuria?  :evil:

Cool. I’m playing  a game and I want to get Japan to attack Amur. I need those Mongolians!

I am playing a league game against Tyzoq using TripleA. He had taken Iwo Jima on USA’s turn 7 with an artillery left occupying. Then on USA’s turn 8, he attempted to move a transport into the sea zone to load the artillery for a noncom move. However, the game will not let him. I can find nothing in the rules stating a kamikaze sea zone will prevent this move if he owns the island. the game will let a transport move into the zone and load during a combat move.

Will a kamikaze sea zone prevent noncom moves for lone transports like subs do? Or is this a glitch in TripleA?

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=29424.msg1058066#msg1058066

@UnknownSoldier:

I am playing a league game against Tyzoq using TripleA.

Good luck with that

Will a kamikaze sea zone prevent noncom moves for lone transports like subs do? Or is this a glitch in TripleA?

Sounds like a glitch.  Kamikazes are only in the combat phase, and do not ever restrict non-coms.

Is there any possible scenerio where a sub can block naval movement? In game now please respond.

@Young:

Is there any possible scenerio where a sub can block naval movement? In game now please respond.

no.  not ever.  subs and transports don’t block movement.  A sub can only block an unescorted amphibious assault.

@kcdzim:

@Young:

Is there any possible scenerio where a sub can block naval movement? In game now please respond.

no.  not ever.  subs and transports don’t block movement.  A sub can only block an unescorted amphibious assault.

Thanks

@Gamerman01:

@UnknownSoldier:

I am playing a league game against Tyzoq using TripleA.

Good luck with that

Will a kamikaze sea zone prevent noncom moves for lone transports like subs do? Or is this a glitch in TripleA?

Sounds like a glitch.  Kamikazes are only in the combat phase, and do not ever restrict non-coms.

Apparently it is a glitch. Veqryn posted a message in the game saying it is an easy fix.

I need all the luck I can get against Tyzoq!

Question about convoying:

It is explained in the European manual page 24 that a sub in SZ97 can cost Italy up to 2 IPCs. This confuses me.

There are 8 IPC’s (Northern Italy, Southern Italy & Albania) worth of territories bordering SZ97, so in theory a single sub can cost 6 IPC’s (two dice rolls * 3). Italy can max loose 8 IPC’s from SZ97. Am I missing something?

Thanks in advance.

@Munck:

Question about convoying:

It is explained in the European manual page 24 that a sub in SZ97 can cost Italy up to 2 IPCs. This confuses me.

There are 8 IPC’s (Northern Italy, Southern Italy & Albania) worth of territories bordering SZ97, so in theory a single sub can cost 6 IPC’s (two dice rolls * 3). Italy can max loose 8 IPC’s from SZ97. Am I missing something?

Thanks in advance.

No, you’re exactly right.  The explanation you are referring to appears to have been overlooked in the changes since OOB.  There was a time when a sub did 2 IPC’s worth of damage, but you are correct that it could do between 0 and 6 IPC’s of damage in Z97 as shown in the example.

Welcome to the boards!  Hopefully you’ll grace us with more of your thoughtful posts in the future.

No, you’re exactly right.  The explanation you are referring to appears to have been overlooked in the changes since OOB.  There was a time when a sub did 2 IPC’s worth of damage, but you are correct that it could do between 0 and 6 IPC’s of damage in Z97 as shown in the example.

Welcome to the boards!  Hopefully you’ll grace us with more of your thoughtful posts in the future.

Thank you for clearing this up  :-)

From the FAQ errata:

Page 24, Convoy Disruption Example 2: The first sentence should read “On Italy’s turn, the UK submarine in sea zone 97 can cost Italy up to 6 IPCs.”

Good question from a thread earlier today.

Axis achieve victory for controlling 8 victory cities on the european side or 6 victory cities on the pacific side for one complete round of play. What does this mean? Example: Germany takes its 8th victory city. Russia takes it back. Japan then takes it back. USA takes it back, and UK reinforces. Italy then takes it back, giving axis 8 victory cities. Anzac and France can’t liberate a victory city. On Germany’s next turn, axis control 8 victory cities. Do the axis win? They didn’t control eight victory cites for a complete round, but they had 8 at the end of their last turn and now have 8 at the start of their turn. It would have been nice if the rulebook defined the victory conditions a little better. I have no idea the definition of a complete round. Also have victory conditions changed since the first addition, and if so what was that change?

This exact question has been addressed on the FAQ (earlier thread), so I know the correct answer with certainty.

The Axis have to control 8 cities or more (or 6 for Pacific) CONTINUOUSLY for an entire round of play.

Say Italy takes over London for the Axis 8th city on I10.  The Axis will win on I11 if the Allies never take (or re-take) a European victory city at any time between I10 and I11.  If at any time between I10 and I11 the Axis lose a city and dip below 8, the clock has to start all over again at such time as the Axis re-claim an 8th city.  If the Axis get 9 or more cities, they can lose a city and still win on I11, as long as they never dip below 8 at any time.

Thanks for the above clarification Gamerman.

Here’s another one.  Is it legal to place ICs on a friendly neutral activated on the same turn?  I’m thinking no but I’d prefer to be certain.

No.  You can only place facilities on territories that were under your control at the beginning of your turn.

Sub on sub naval battle:

Does the attacking sub get a free shot before the defender can submerge?

If submerge is chosen by the defender, if a 1 or 2 is rolled does the first shot sink the sub?

–Jeff

And is the above scenario correctly handled by Triple A?