Naval Units avoiding battle

Two-space movement of land units is allowed only in the Tournament Rules.

@mendieta:

i made order on HBGeu, man who work there is called Delaja, you can ask what you want and you will get answer next day. My shiping cost to Macedonia where 7 eu,( igot invoice on e mail, but i dont pay this shipping cost because my order was +50 eu. Also got track number)

Yeah, HBGeu is situated in the Netherlands so the shipping costs are really low for me (Belgium).
It just sucks that they don’t have any German sets for A&A 1914 left…

It’s in the errata/FAQ.

protevangelium makes some great points about how lopsided the sea’s were, and sub warfare being the best option for the CP in the war. Subs are a bit lacking in this edition as well as others IMO (nearly impossible to raid convoys, or inflict econ damage). The Austrians, and Turks were very limited in their abilities. The Germans did have a more modern surface fleet (tried to enter a naval arms race before the war), but failed in comparison to the Brits. In this game the Germans can get temporary control of the North Sea early though and add to their fleet. Once the rest of French Fleet comes up the UK still doesn’t need to build much to protect allied transports OOB (two French BB’s is a nice way to start for the allies rebuild). If the allies want to knock the German fleet out, then it could get expensive, but do they need to, or just set-up a multi national defense that the Germans can’t touch to keep allied transports afloat. Then there is always the 1-2 punch if the allies want to go aggressive. I still believe the problem lies with the French fleet (and the abilities of the sub to a point).

When we play we always reduce the Atlantic French Fleet to just a cruiser (swap BB for cruiser and remove the transport). We have done this even before Larry introduced it in the Tourney rules. It does help for game play, and better reflects what the French had in the Atlantic. The French Atlantic fleet was more of a support to the Brits (not nearly equal). Before the war the French naval focus was in the Med not knowing the intentions of the Italians (fearing an Italian attack which the game doesn’t reflect).

It would have been nice for the sub to have a larger roll in this edition having more raiding ability or sz’s to attack econ. Should destroyers be introduced so subs have a better survival rate? Maybe the naval set-up cost should be tweaked. BB’s at 12 IPCs is too cost effective IMO (should they be 15 IPCs?), no one buys cruisers. Just thinking out load……don’t read to much into it. WB

Welcome, blindingblizzard!

@blindingblizzard:

The rules state that U.S. ships cannot move into contested sea zones.Â

There is no such thing as a contested sea zone.  The rule states that the US may not move units into a contested territory.  (For clarifications on this, see the FAQ thread.)

In your example, Germany may choose to either include the US ships in its attack, bringing the US into the war, or ignore them.

To simplify things, yes. Rail anywhere in Europe and starting Ottoman tts.

Constantinople does not stop rail movement from Bulgaria to Angora or Smyrna.

No Dreadnoughts should ever be built in the game since it takes 3+ years from start to finish. I understand it makes the game unplayable, but accuracy and not fun must be part of the game.

Extrapolating this further all other naval units take 6-8 turns to build. I understand this means that half the game will have empty oceans, but oh well. Accuracy and not fun is whats important.

Limits on how many of one type of unit get built would also presumably be part of Larry’s rules.

If one thing we know is Axis and Allies is a perfect representation of Historical accuracy, and not fun anymore.

Enjoy the game.