Axis and Allies 1914 FAQ/Question and Answer Thread

Well this FAQ has certainly been helpful. Hopefuly we can have something written out by Friday? (at least the major issues)

Has Krieg answered if battleships can repair at friendly ports? (not just their own)

Oztea: don’t think he has, but the rules suggest not.
They can only be repaired in a SZ that shares a base with a territory they control.
The word “friendly” is not used.

Yes; in effect the Reds become a 4th Cental Power, though they cannot operate outside Russia.
The original Russians continue as the Whites, so you only need a set of WWII Red Russians and Soviet control markers.
I will write up a provisional piece on this soon; the trick is to prevent the Allies from manipulating the revolution by, for example, placing a large Allied garrison in Moscow.

@Texas:

@Flashman:

Doesn’t sit well with me. Would the Central Powers really sign a treaty with the Bolsheviks that allowed them to keep original CP tt?

More and more, I believe my own “Reds and Whites” solution is not only the most historical, but the simplest system to implement.

Would the allies support the whites and CP the reds?  Historically, the reds didn’t get support from the CPs.  Perhaps that is why the allies can still pass through Russia freely, they are supporting the whites, but if they do so they should have to pay a penalty for doing so, such as lose one unit each turn they are in Russia.

@oztea:

Well this FAQ has certainly been helpful. Hopefuly we can have something written out by Friday? (at least the major issues)

There will not be anything “official” by Friday, as we like to wait a while before publishing an official FAQ to see what issues pop up.  However, I will summarize the three errors in the Rulebook and the half dozen clarifications that I’ve made so far by then.

@oztea:

Has Krieg answered if battleships can repair at friendly ports? (not just their own)

Yes, they can.  This is one of the errors I mentioned above - battleships can be repaired at any friendly naval base that is capable of mobilizing sea units.  The other two errors are that the US can’t move units into neutral territories while it is neutral, and you must have been in control of a naval base at the beginning of your turn in order to mobilize sea units from it.

Note that control of a naval base is not the same as control of the territory that it’s in.  You control a naval base if you either control the territory it’s in or that territory is one of your original territories and it’s contested.

This came up last night: Italy (on the same turn) took control of Trieste (by an unopposed land movement from Albania) and sailed a fleet into SZ 18.

Does Austria roll for mines against the Italian ships? My presumption is yes, since Trieste is Austrian controlled at the start of the Italian turn.

That is, all combat is considered simultaneous.

Thanks, that answers one of my previous questions:

Can a player purchase ships when he does not control or contest an original naval base, in the expectation of recapturing it on this turn.
Presumably if he was stupid enough to buy such a ship, he loses it without refund (rather than being able to place it a turn later).

I assume the same thing applies to land units for a player who buys them, then in the course of his own turn loses his capital (possible in this version).

@Flashman:

This came up last night: Italy (on the same turn) took control of Trieste (by an unopposed land movement from Albania) and sailed a fleet into SZ 18.

Does Austria roll for mines against the Italian ships? My presumption is yes, since Trieste is Austrian controlled at the start of the Italian turn.

That is, all combat is considered simultaneous.

Yes.  Italy doesn’t gain control of the territory until the Conduct Combat phase.

Thank you for clarifying those 3 errors, Krieghund.

Krieg is there any chance the revolution rules will specify that russian units and control markers are removed from original CP territory?

That would make the transition to a post revolution game a lot smoother

To what extent does a fleet have to declare its intentions for a 2 space move?

I assume that a fleet sailing into enemy SZs can, if it hits mines in the first, decide not to continue to a 2nd even if it originally intended to.

But what if it intended to amphibiously assault after the 2nd move; is it still legal to call off the attack?

Example: Russian fleet sailing from Petrograd intending to AA Kiel but suffering from mines in SZ 11.

Are contested sea zones treated exactly as per contested land areas for movement purposes?

@Krieghund:

Note that control of a naval base is not the same as control of the territory that it’s in.  You control a naval base if you either control the territory it’s in or that territory is one of your original territories and it’s contested.

Just to get clarification on this, if you lose control of that territory, but later contest it again, do you regain control of that naval base?

Also, say you lose control of the territory, but one of your allies later contests it, so none of your units are present, do you regain control at that point, and if not who does control it?

I guess to summarize, does control default to the original owner regardless of how the territory became contested?

@Texas:

@Krieghund:

Note that control of a naval base is not the same as control of the territory that it’s in.  You control a naval base if you either control the territory it’s in or that territory is one of your original territories and it’s contested.

Just to get clarification on this, if you lose control of that territory, but later contest it again, do you regain control of that naval base?

YES

Also, say you lose control of the territory, but one of your allies later contests it, so none of your units are present, do you regain control at that point, and if not who does control it?

NOBODY CONTROLS THE TT, YOU CONTROL THE NAVAL BASE

I guess to summarize, does control default to the original owner regardless of how the territory became contested?

I BELIEVE THIS IS THE CASE

@oztea:

Krieg is there any chance the revolution rules will specify that russian units and control markers are removed from original CP territory?

There’s always a chance, but I wouldn’t count on it.

@Flashman:

To what extent does a fleet have to declare its intentions for a 2 space move?

I assume that a fleet sailing into enemy SZs can, if it hits mines in the first, decide not to continue to a 2nd even if it originally intended to.

But what if it intended to amphibiously assault after the 2nd move; is it still legal to call off the attack?

Example: Russian fleet sailing from Petrograd intending to AA Kiel but suffering from mines in SZ 11.

Mines are rolled for after ship movement is completed, so you can’t stop moving if you hit a mine in the first sea zone.  You can, however, call off an amphibious assault.

@Flashman:

Are contested sea zones treated exactly as per contested land areas for movement purposes?

There is no such thing as a contested sea zone.  Sea zones are either friendly or hostile, depending on the presence of enemy surface warships.

@Texas:

I guess to summarize, does control default to the original owner regardless of how the territory became contested?

Yes.

OK, wrong terminology; what I meant was can a fleet sharing SZ1 with an enemy fleet sail away and attack an enemy fleet in SZ2 ignoring the enemy in SZ1?

Yes.

@questioneer:

Kreighund,

Any chance that there will be an official change for the tank- making it a cost of $5 instead of $6???  I don’t wanna get ahead of myself but several here think (and those tested the game already think) that the tank is useless as it stands.  No real purpose of buying it, might as well soak hits with the more powerful infantry or artillery.  The tank as a unit already seems broken.  Can you explain futher???

Waiting for a reply on this- thanks. :-)

@questioneer:

@questioneer:

Kreighund,

Any chance that there will be an official change for the tank- making it a cost of $5 instead of $6???�  I don’t wanna get ahead of myself but several here think (and those tested the game already think) that the tank is useless as it stands.�  No real purpose of buying it, might as well soak hits with the more powerful infantry or artillery.�  The tank as a unit already seems broken.�  Can you explain futher???

Waiting for a reply on this- thanks. :-)

I think once you see it in action or run the numbers, you will change your mind on the tank.

Here is an example of its effect in combat compared to an equal cost of 2 infantry.  For simplicity, I won’t list the units accompanying these units and the numbers are the sum of all units attack/defense.

Offense 1
1 tank - attack 2
2 inf - attack 4

Defense 1
1 tank, 1 inf - defend 4
2 inf - defend 6

Offense 2
1 tank, 1 inf - attack 4
2 inf - attack 4

Defense 2
1 tank, 2 inf - defend 7
2 inf - defend 6

It just keeps adding after that.  The initial investment will weaken you, but the western front will not be one in one round of combat.  Also, say the above was taking place in Lorraine, the infantry saved by the tank are infantry that didn’t have to be purchased and marched 4 spots from Berlin.  The combat is a lot slower in this version, even more so with the large number of spaces between Berlin and Paris.

Sorry if this has been asked already. I have some questions about amphibs asssults, air support and the order.

A) In an amphib does the defenders first strike art shot (kill shot) happen before the dog fight, or after the dog fight?

Sorry if there is more in the rule book about this, I very well may have missed it. What I’ve read about def first strike art don’t mention air support (just says fire a kill shot at 3 or less). Plus and an attacking ftr offloading from a transport could be lost to def first strike art fire so there might not be a dog fight (from this thread?). I’m assuming the first strike art shot is done before the dog fight (and that’s what I used below), of course if the dog fight was done first, them wouldn’t it upgrade you def art for a kill shot @ 4 or less if you won the dog fight?  (I’m so confused).

So you would do

1. Navy battle (if applicable).

2. Bombardment (if applicable).

3. Off load attackers units from transport

4. Defenders first strike art shot @ 3 or less (kill shot) if def has art.

5. Remove attackers causalities from units transported by sea from #4 , and they don’t get to return fire (an attacking inf participating from adjacent land territory would suffice for “must have inf last man standing”)

6. Dog fight to the death (if both sides have ftrs) determine air superiority.

7. Fight remaining land battle as normal (upgrading art if one side gains air support)

If the above order is wrong please set me straight

B) In an amphib (sea battle was won by attacker, or nonexistent) if attacker has a ftr on a transport it does it participate in the dog fight as if it flew over right (subject to defending first strike art from above).

@questioneer:

@questioneer:

Kreighund,

Any chance that there will be an official change for the tank- making it a cost of $5 instead of $6???�  I don’t wanna get ahead of myself but several here think (and those tested the game already think) that the tank is useless as it stands.�  No real purpose of buying it, might as well soak hits with the more powerful infantry or artillery.�  The tank as a unit already seems broken.�  Can you explain futher???

Waiting for a reply on this- thanks. :-)

You are getting ahead of yourself.

@WILD:

Sorry if this has been asked already. I have some questions about amphibs asssults, air support and the order.

A) In an amphib does the defenders first strike art shot (kill shot) happen before the dog fight, or after the dog fight?

Sorry if there is more in the rule book about this, I very well may have missed it. What I’ve read about def first strike art don’t mention air support (just says fire a kill shot at 3 or less). Plus and an attacking ftr offloading from a transport could be lost to def first strike art fire so there might not be a dog fight (from this thread?). I’m amusing the first strike art shot is done before the dog fight (and that’s what I used below), of course if the dog fight was done first, them wouldn’t it upgrade you def art for a kill shot @ 4 or less?  (I’m so confused).

So you would do

1. Navy battle (if applicable).

2. Bombardment (if applicable).

3. Off load attackers units from transport

4. Defenders first strike art shot @ 3 or less (kill shot) if def has art.

5. Remove attackers causalities from units transported by sea from #4 , and they don’t get to return fire (an attacking inf participating from adjacent land territory would suffice for “must have inf last man standing”)

6. Dog fight to the death (if both sides have ftrs) determine air superiority.

7. Fight remaining land battle as normal (upgrading art if one side gains air support)

If the above order is wrong please set me straight

The pre-emptive artillery strike is simply inserted before the land battle for assaults only (not reinforcements).  It is not affected by air superiority.  Any and all offloading units are subject to being hit, and are removed immediately.  The land battle ensues normally, with the exception of possible battleship bombardment being included (assaults only).  See page 22 of the Rulebook.

The order of events is:

1. Sea battle
2. Offload units
3. Pre-emptive artillery strike
4. Land battle (including battleship bombardment, if any)

@WILD:

B) In an amphib (sea battle was won by attacker, or nonexistent) if attacker has a ftr on a transport it does it participate in the dog fight as if it flew over right (subject to defending first strike art from above).

Yes.  Remember, we’re talking about battles that last weeks, if not months.  Amphibious air units (like tanks) are being unloaded in crates from transports and brought ashore.  During this process, they can be hit by the pre-emptive artillery strike.  After they are ashore (assuming they make it), they are prepared for fighting and may participate in the land battle.

Does anybody know why it takes Larry Harris so long to post his report of the first US-turn?

It`s not that I expect big surprises but I think it would round off the official walk through turn 1…