Naval Questions

@mikemikemike
the sea battle occurs before the amphibious assualt.

If you want to kill the transport… in a (very one-sided) naval battle, all naval units fight together+any air. You don’t get to pick units. Only air has that option.

Thus, no bombard.

You should watch some of Adam’s Germany plans in League games.  He has some nefarious orders including bringing the fleet around into the Med to prevent subs from convoy raiding.  The small fleet is also sufficient to take Gibraltar on the journey there.  Other people use a limited Axis fleet to convoy raid the UK.

After G1, focus on taking Moscow or heading to the oilfields.  The time is ticking to get the Axis income close to the Allied income.  I have seen too many people lose as Axis because Germany gets in a fleet building competition with the United States.

True, I did not mean to say that one bad-luck battle increases your odds of a future good-luck battle. What I meant is that Global 1940 is a much bigger game than, say, Revised. Global has more units involved and more battles that matter. The effect of having more units and more battles is to soften the effect of any one unit missing or of any one battle going poorly. In other words, as you broaden your sample size, you get closer to achieving average results in the aggregate.

Thank you ,too ghr2!

Welcome, General A-Ron!

Wheatbeer is correct.  Since Kamikaze strikes occur at the beginning of the Conduct Combat phase, any attacking air units are already in the air.

On the subject of convoy disruption, here’s a quote from the 2nd edition Rulebook:

There are three conditions that must exist for this kind of attack to occur:
1. The sea zone must have a “Convoy” image,
2. The sea zone must be adjacent to one or more of your controlled territories, and
3. At least 1 warship belonging to a power with which you are at war must be in the sea zone. (Any ships in the sea zone that belong to you or a friendly power will have no effect on convoy disruption.)

Convoy attacks on “Convoy” sea zones are conducted in the following manner.

Each enemy warship (except for aircraft carriers) and carrier-based air unit in the sea zone might cause the loss of 1 or more IPCs from your income for the turn. The owners of enemy battleships, cruisers, and/or destroyers rolls one die for each such unit, and the owners of enemy submarines and/or air units roll two dice for each such unit. Any rolls of “4” or higher are ignored. The results of these rolls that are “3” or less are totaled, and the resulting number is the total convoy damage suffered in the disruption. However, this number might be limited. Each disrupted convoy can’t lose more IPCs than the total IPC value of your controlled territories adjacent to the sea zone. Also, no single territory can lose more IPCs than its own IPC value from multiple disrupted adjacent convoys (for example, Japan cannot lose more than 8 IPCs from disrupted convoys in sea zones 6 and 19). After these limits are applied, the final total is subtracted from your income for the turn.

At the end of each power’s turn they check to see if there are any enemy warships in convoy zones that border territories controlled by the power in question.  So, in your example, at the end of Italy’s turn, they would deduct up to 2 IPC from their income for the US sub present in z97.  They cannot lose more income than the total value of territories that Italy controls that border z97.  If Italy is under Allies control, the convoy disruption is irrelevant, because Italy does not collect income while it is enemy-controlled.  And the new controller would not lose income to a friendly unit (the US sub).

Then, on Germany’s turn, they would lose up to 2 IPC income for the US sub in z97.  Again, they can’t lose more than the total value of German controlled territories bordering z97.

So, essentially, the US sub is doing convoy disruption to BOTH Italy and Germany as long as they both control territories that border z97.

@Krieghund:

During your Collect Income phase, check for any convoy sea zones that are adjacent to territories that you control and that also contain warships (not transports) belonging to powers with which you are at war.  For each such sea zone, first add up the total IPC value of the adjacent territories that you control, giving you the maximum number of IPCs that you can lose in that zone.  Then, add up the total number of enemy warships (submarines count as two) to get your potential losses in that zone.  Finally, subtract whichever of those two numbers is lower from the income you collect.  Repeat this process for each eligible sea zone.

Example:  Italy controls Southern Italy, Northern Italy, Yugoslavia, and Albania, and there are two UK submarines in sea zone 97.  The total IPCs controlled by Italy adjacent to sea zone 97 is 10.  The two subs can destroy 4 IPCs.  Since 4 is less than 10 (the damage done is less than the maximum that the sea zone can sustain), Italy subtracts 4 IPCs from the income it collects.

but say, greece has 2 adjacent convoy zones, can greece lose 4 IPC?
i thought no, but not sure. wouldn’t be very logical
and what if german has greece and yugolavia, and US puts subs in adriatic sea. do they do convoy damage to germans and italians at same time?

@Razor:

It sure dont work that way in the Pacific, if Japan attack neutral DEI, then Japan is suddenly at war with everybody, even neutral USA.

Not immediately.  Japan is only at war with UK/ANZAC.  The US is allowed to declare war on Japan on its next turn.  The same thing applies here.  If Italy declares war on the USSR, the USSR is allowed to declare war on Germany on its next turn, but it is not immediately at war with Germany.

@Razor:

And if it was the other way around, that Russia attacked Italy, then I am pretty sure that Russia would automatically be at war with Germany also.

No, but Germany could declare war on the USSR on its next turn.

@Razor:

If Italy attack USA, is only Italy at war with USA then ? Germany is not ?

Correct.  However, either Germany or USA may declare war on the other on their next turn.