Sub vs carrier w/ planes rules clarification

@Ichabod:

@PainState:

A lot of posters seemed stunned at this scenario, never scene it ever happen or even could happen. Now that I mulled it over last night and looked at the rules and so forth it is very obvious to me why no one has ever scene this scenario. Because the scenario makes no logical sense.

Italy DOW on Russia and moves in 2 tanks into Eastern Poland.
Russia is now at war with Italy and can DOW on Germany at the start of their next turn, turn 3.
Germany on Turn 3 does not DOW on Russia and just non combats into Eastern Poland.
Russia at the start of Turn 3 DOW on Germany and off we go.

There is no logical reason why Russia would not DOW on Germany at the start of Turn 3, none.

Heck you could argue that it makes no logical sense that Germany did not DOW on Russia at the start of G3 since Italy brought Russia into the war and Russia WILL DOW on Germany on R3.

Hi PainState,

From my perspective, if I was planning on doing a G3 Barbarossa AND I wanted to drive towards the south, then yes, it makes sense to not DOW. My stack will be together except for the minimum required mobile units and maybe 1 AAA in Poland so Russia doesn’t attack Poland to get their NO for occupying an Axis territory. But E. Poland will be real strong because the German air will be there and maybe bombers will also be in range of a raid on the Moscow factory. Also, 5 IPCs is more income than I’d probably get as Germany on the 1st turn.

There are a few disadvantages of course. 1, Russian blockers can’t be attacked. 2, the Scandinavian units are behind. But for me that’s ok, I just use them to lay siege anyways. I never expect to get Moscow on turn 6 anymore. I assume that the UK/Anzac and that lone French fighter are going to get to Moscow.Â

Yes planes can pass over any zone that contain enemy ships, enemy planes, or enemy units. Planes cannot pass over neutral countries. In sbr’s they have to fight their way in if escorted or not if they are intercepted. After the interception or not then they get shot at by aaa and then if they survive that they get to bomb the factories and the tac bomber’s can bomb the airfields and naval bases. You are right that in the older version the aa was always active but not anymore. Hope this helps! :-)

Good Point Krieghund… I had not thought of a carrier as a warship but corrected my post above.

As for G42 it is geared toward tournament play, but it could be used as a way to teach Global more quickly. I like the idea of having nations like France having a role in WWII, but G42 short cuts much of the tedious wait because all the players are at war. It is a quickened version of G40, but it’s also a good alternative for players who need a shorter game session but like the complexity of Global.

I haven’t tried a F2F game yet but I would have an easier time getting a session in with the 42 set-up than Global. I also think G42 may pick up steam if it’s supported by the A&A community by and large due to the fact that we had five releases of the series less than than two years ago and won’t likey get another unless a second edition of 1914 is released.

Check out the set-up and if you like it show your support.

@Krieghund:

@ghr2:

I need to ask someone since the rules on larry’s site had too much ambiguity.  If russia declares war on japan and attacks a japanese terr (whether boardering Mong or not) then LATER if japan attacks a russian terr boardering Mong, does Mong turn russian?  (basically, russia started the war)

It doesn’t matter whether USSR and Japan are at war, or who started it.  What matters is attacks against territories that border Mongolian territories.  If USSR declares war on Japan, but does not attack any Japanese-controlled territories that are adjacent to Mongolian territories, then Japan attacks a USSR-controlled territory that is adjacent to a Mongolian territory, Mongolia will still ally itself with the Soviet Union.

See Ghr2, cut and dry, sweet and simple!  :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

hold on a sec, I thought the title of this thread meant it required a sub and a trn.  Is the title off or is mightypol not paying attention….

@JamesAleman:

@Stefano1189:

@Krieghund:

Yes, they can.

Is it possibile to have kamikaze aircrafts? Let me explain: can i use aircrafts to conduct attacks at sea that they have no possibility of return?

No. You must be able to land, even if that landing site is pending a naval battle or non combat carrier move or sea zone build.

Japan has a special Kamikaze attack that is activated by the allies under specific conditions, but it does not involve normal air units on the board. These are 6 one time attacks on enemy ships excluding subs and transports.

See: page 21 AAEurope 1940 bottom paragraph under “Air Units” third bullet point, last sentence: “You can’t deliberately move an air unit out of range of a potential safe landing space.”

See also: page 13 AAEurope 1940 first paragraph under “Air Units” first sentence: “An air unit that moves in the Combat Move phase must generally reserve part of its move value for the Noncombat Move phase, at which point it must return to a safe landing spot using its remaining movement.”

Note: This is not an official answer, just being helpful.

Thank you. :-)

Yes