Axis and Allies 1914 FAQ/Question and Answer Thread

@TheVenocWarlord:

Here is what I do for contested territories:

When an army moves in to contest a territory, I immediately place that attacking army’s control marker on the territory upside down. I then also immediately deduct the lost income on the chart to show the contested situation. Much simpler to show the changes.

I believe the rule book (p.15) has you deduct the income immediately also.  Remembering to do that will save a lot of time when calculating income.  I use orange chips from HBG to identify contested territories.  I guess you could also use the grey or red chips from other AA games.

Regarding calling off an amphibious assault: can this be done due to the loss of ANY unit involved in the operation; for example a cruiser escorting the transports, or a Battleship intending to bombard; or must the loss include that of a transport carrying  the intended invading land units?

The former.

The rules state that units being loaded onto a transport “must use their entire move to load onto and/or offload from a transport.” A fighter’s move is 2 spaces. Does this indicates that fighters cannot move 1 space into the coastal tt, then use the remaining 1 space of their movement as their “move” onto the transport? Like tanks in the WWII versions?

Also can land a plane on a transport if the transport is not on the coast, but still 2 movement spots away?

@anoid226:

The rules state that units being loaded onto a transport “must use their entire move to load onto and/or offload from a transport.” A fighter’s move is 2 spaces. Does this indicates that fighters cannot move 1 space into the coastal tt, then use the remaining 1 space of their movement as their “move” onto the transport?

They cannot.

@anoid226:

Like tanks in the WWII versions?

They can’t, either.

@Quintus:

Also can land a plane on a transport if the transport is not on the coast, but still 2 movement spots away?

No.

So when exactly can I “call off” an amphibious assault; say my only escort is sunk by mines, rendering the operation impossible, can the transports stay where they are and not roll for mines. Or, since movement is considered simultaneous, do they still have to roll for mines even though they will not in fact be moving through to the target SZ even if they avoid the mines?

Or do they still have to move through anyway, but just not make the assault, which might be delayed suicide if there are hostile ships where they are moving to?

In other words you can call off the landing, but not the planned movement leading to the landing, even if it involves the transports moving 2 SZs including moving unescorted into a mined and hostile SZ?

@Flashman:

In other words you can call off the landing, but not the planned movement leading to the landing, even if it involves the transports moving 2 SZs including moving unescorted into a mined and hostile SZ?

That’s correct.

@Krieghund:

@Flashman:

In other words you can call off the landing, but not the planned movement leading to the landing, even if it involves the transports moving 2 SZs including moving unescorted into a mined and hostile SZ?

That’s correct.

Attempt it as your own risk.  8-)

Apparently there’s been some confusion about one of the clarifications:

If the colony of a minor power aligned to your power is moved into or captured by a friendly power, that power takes control of the territory.

The intent of this clarification was to indicate which power takes control when the colony was moved into for the first time.  It was never intended that a power can steal a colony from another major power on the same side.  For example, if Italy moves into Belgian Congo initially, it gets control of the territory.  However, if all Italian units later leave the territory, Britain cannot move units in and take control.  Britain can only gain control if the Central Powers take Belgian Congo from Italy and then Britain retakes it.

I have updated the entry on page 14 of this thread to the following:

If the colony of a minor power aligned to your power is moved into for the first time or captured by a friendly power, that power takes control of the territory.

A minor point on RR; an original Russian tt is occupied entirely by British units at the Revolution.

I think the rule is that the Brits have to leave by the end of their next turn or be interned, and that that no other units of either side may ever enter the tt again.

Do I place a Russian “Commissar” unit there to indicate that this is an off-limits tt, rather than “empty” as a result of a wipeout?

@Flashman:

I think the rule is that the Brits have to leave by the end of their next turn or be interned, and that that no other units of either side may ever enter the tt again.

Correct.

@Flashman:

Do I place a Russian “Commissar” unit there to indicate that this is an off-limits tt, rather than “empty” as a result of a wipeout?

There’s no need, as it’s not a shared territory.  The fact that it’s controlled by Russia indicates that it’s off limits.

wow, 29 pages already

krieg, are you going to put together an official FAQ and Errata with all answers to all questions?

i would hope so, otherwise this is going to go to the global mark of 100+ page faq thread…

@Krieghund:

@Flashman:

In other words you can call off the landing, but not the planned movement leading to the landing, even if it involves the transports moving 2 SZs including moving unescorted into a mined and hostile SZ?

That’s correct.

Unless I’m mistaken, according to the rules, transports can’t move unescorted into a hostile seazone, so how does this work?

[Edit: Added ‘unescorted’]

They weren’t unescorted when you moved them in.  It’s your bad luck if they end up that way after rolling for mines.

@Krieghund:

They weren’t unescorted when you moved them in.  It’s your bad luck if they end up that way after rolling for mines.

Ok, gotcha. Thanks!

But weren’t the transports unescorted when they moved into the 2nd SZ after all the escorting warships had been sunk by mines moving into the 1st?

That’s why I suggested that they should be able to call off the 2nd movement.

Do fighters movement end on combat?

Or can a fighter move one space ‘fight’ then land on another space?

How about begin in a contested tt, after combat in that tt can the fighter move 2 spaces to somewheres else?

@Flashman:

But weren’t the transports unescorted when they moved into the 2nd SZ after all the escorting warships had been sunk by mines moving into the 1st?

Technically, no, because you complete movement (except for offloading) before you roll for mines.  At the end of the sea units’ movement, the transports were escorted.

This is the way it is for two reasons.  First, it’s a lot easier to just move the ships and then roll for mines encountered along the way and adjust for results than it is to worry about which ships move first and make decisions about movement based on the results of mine rolls (which also slows down the game).  Second, having unpredictable results from mine rolls and being stuck with the consequences gives mine fields a potency beyond their 1 in 6 chance of sinking a ship, making them a more formidable threat.

@Uncrustable:

Do fighters movement end on combat?

Or can a fighter move one space ‘fight’ then land on another space?

How about begin in a contested tt, after combat in that tt can the fighter move 2 spaces to somewheres else?

All movement happens before combat (except offloading from transports in a hostile sea zone).  There is no “noncombat move” in this game.

Page 15 of the rulebook states that if you move all of your units out of a territory originally controlled by an opposing power, that power will take control even if it has no units present. In other words, you have to leave a garrison to retain control.

Is this true even if that power’s capital has fallen into enemy hands?

Is this true OF the capital once you capture it? (i.e you have to leave a garrison or they regain control and start collecting money again? Because then I’d just continuously move out so I can move right back in and re-collect)