The FAQ Thread

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in The FAQ Thread:

@captainnapalm Oh, sorry Napalm! I was deducting. “For a minor power the home country includes the primary nation but not its colonies, islands or conquered land zones.” So we know the primary nation is not colonies, islands, or conquered land zones. The perfect example is Greece. The Greek home countries are Macedonia, Thessaly, and Peloponnese. Crete is not home country.

That is a fair deduction, and probably correct. I was just wondering if it was specifically stated in the rules. Some major nation’s home counties don’t follow those rules, so I hesitate to have full confidence in that meaning.

New Zealand is an island, yet is home country. Northern Ireland is not connected to a capital by land, but it is home country. East Prussia is neither an island, colony, nor conquered territory, yet it is not home country.

I agree with your deduction, but I’d like to see the rules state the rules, rather than relying on our individual deductions.

I don’t remember where I saw that. It may be something I made based on the map. Don’t take it as authoritative.

Now for another question:
Can you scramble into a zone where you (the scrambling power) do not have a unit or Facility?
For example, the US scrambling from the British Midlands to London, where there are no US units.
In the errata’d rules it says: "[A nation can scramble] where it has at least one Defending unit or facility.”
Does “it” mean the nation, or the alliance? Airbases are shared, so you can scramble from an allied airbase, but are the defending units shared? Can a fighter scramble to protect foreign units? Or, even non aligned units? (i.e. a US fighter protecting a USSR ship)
Thoughts are welcome

Also:
Table 4-7 says:
“A neutral Republican Spain will align with the USSR if attacked.”
Does this include a DOW? Or just an attack?

@trig said in The FAQ Thread:

Now for another question:
Can you scramble into a zone where you (the scrambling power) do not have a unit or Facility?
For example, the US scrambling from the British Midlands to London, where there are no US units.
In the errata’d rules it says: "[A nation can scramble] where it has at least one Defending unit or facility.”
Does “it” mean the nation, or the alliance? Airbases are shared, so you can scramble from an allied airbase, but are the defending units shared? Can a fighter scramble to protect foreign units? Or, even non aligned units? (i.e. a US fighter protecting a USSR ship)
Thoughts are welcome

These are some of my thoughts, from a previous thread:

“I would like the errata to change the wording to “if your ‘alliance’ has a defending unit or facility”, or “if your ‘nation’ has a defending unit or facility.” Because I don’t know which is correct. We play alliance, btw.”

I do not think you should be able to scramble to defend a non-alliance unit or facility, personally, but it isn’t unthinkable.

Rule 8.6 says that the owner of the airbase can scramble fighters, but does not limit this to his own fighters.

I also play it that allied fighters can scramble.

we should really start new topics for new questions as this thread is getting hard to follow

@noneshallpass Maybe, it is just nice to have it all in one place. There is just a lot of questions right now
I wasn’t asking about the ability to scramble (as far as the airbase). That is assured. The question is do you need a unit from your nation, or just you alliance?

This should be added to the FAQ: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/36935/vichy-french-colonies

@trig said in The FAQ Thread:

@noneshallpass (…) > I wasn’t asking about the ability to scramble (as far as the airbase). That is assured. The question is do you need a unit from your nation, or just you alliance?

Rule 8.6 (as modified by the Errata) says :

Airbases allows its owner to send up to three Fightes into combat in adjacent zone where it has at least one Defending unit or facility. (…)

It seems clear enough that its/it refers to the owner of the Airbase and that you cannot scramble when you do not have units of a facility in the adjacent zone.

@noneshallpass
For me the problem lie in that allies may share bases.
According to the first question on the FAQ, this means that allied fighters can scramble from allied airbases. The question then, is that unit that allows a scramble shared? Is that section of the sentence allies or nation? The “it” is just to vague.

Nevermind. The errata is up:
Page 35: 8.6
“Airbases allows its owner to send up to three Fighters into combat in adjacent zones where its Alliance has at least one Defending unit or facility. Scramble is declared at the end of the Attacker’s Combat Movement.”

A couple of more

• This may have already been answered, but can Germany LL IPC to Vichy to complete ships on their build chart (despite them lacking a factory)
• When damaging a railway, is the entire railway network in a land zone affected, or is just one of the boarder crossings affected? Also if its the latter, can you specifically bomb a railway’s connection to a facility (like a shipyard)

@insanehoshi in answer to question one Yes.
Question 2: you can bomb a railway to break the chain, you can also bomb a port or other naval facility to make them useless until repaired.

@insanehoshi On page 61 of the rulebook, as well as the Vichy France reference sheet:
For ships on the French Production Chart, roll a D12:
DIE ROLL RESULT
1-7 Scuttled, remove from game.
8-10 Remains Vichy French and
stays on the Production chart
until Vichy France Aligns to a
Major Power or surrenders.
Germany can lend-lease IPP to
Vichy for completion.
11-12 Replace with German
equivalent on the
Production chart.

Ok. I need you 36 39 guys to give me your opinion on this rule I have and want to make a change. Figured most would not see this question in house rules. I’ll post link here.
If you guys want this removed no problem.
Thanks

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/37035/when-moscow-falls-to-axis/8

@gen-manstein I probably should understand your background a bit.

Looks like you have a house rule where every two turns Soviet infantry defend at +1 for a winter rule (cool rule, btw)? And it looks like you have a special rule for how many units can be built on a territory, looks like double the territory value? You mention 4 months as well, have you modified your rules where 3 game turns equals a year?

Probably not really important to your overall questions, which look largely around what’s fair for the German player to build/do on Moscow.

What about a rule where captured territories with factories, whether captured or built, can only build a maximum of 1 unit? You eliminate the German ability to produce a lot of units far from home that way which, I agree with you, is a bit unrealistic that they could conceivably churn out a large number of units that quickly.

“1. Should russia get to build and place units at a factory and move at end of turn.”

That seems like a pretty hefty Russian advantage, even if the reasoning is impending capital takeover.

“2. Should Germany get to build 6 units in Moscow that fast ? 4 months but can’t move till following turn but can defend Moscow better.”

Kind of what I said above, I agree that Germany maybe shouldn’t be allowed to build 6 units in Moscow.

Some potential rule thoughts below:

• What if you had a rule where, on the next Russian turn after Moscow falls, the Russians can build new factories elsewhere for cheaper that their original cost? Like, if you’re playing the base game cost of a Major Factory at 6/6/6, maybe they only cost half that?
• Or a rule where, instead of it taking 3 turns to build a new major factory, maybe you can build one in a single turn that first turn after Moscow falls?
• If your rule currently is that you lose all money when your capital is taken (like base game rules), maybe a special Soviet rule where they only lose half? That way they can rebuild quickly like my above thoughts?

I think you’re trying to simulate the historical ability of the Russians to move factories quickly for use, while also not handicapping the Russians in game such a great deal in the situations like you’re describing, have I got that right? The above might alleviate those concerns. You can still build to protect Moscow without moving your existing factory, without having to worry about the Germans being able to build a lot of men by limiting them to one unit per factory in captured territories, while also allowing the Russians to quickly rebuild a factory elsewhere by allowing them to keep some money and/or lowering the cost/build time of Russian factories for that first turn after Moscow capture only?

Sorry if I’ve misunderstood your question.

Thanks for reply. First off this is for my game and not 36/39. If anybody didn’t know.
Yes all your suggestions have been looked at.
Only major factory’s at capitals. Minors can only be built on rest of territories and produce up to territory value only. So really not a problem with German builds until the Moscow ic is involved.
Also to let you know Russia can move 1 factory per turn undamaged and if they get there NA Russian factories can 1 time in game move 2 factories once in game.
So yes moving factories needs to be done in order to build later and further east in Urals.

Yes will look at getting half of Russia’s money if Moscow falls. Up to Germany to not damage the oil derricks in Middle East and convoy raid supplies to archangel to receive a decent amount of money when Moscow’s captured.

Russia will still get to collect income for rest of territories they control. Plus also they get a free tank at tankograd and can buy another for 4 icps so they still can buy good stuff. Plus figs and they do receive 1 LL unit from chart.
Should explain all Russia stuff.
They can also receive a inf or mech if they get both theses NAs in game. So they have really no problem building back up some.
Thinking with going with
Moscow falls factory moves to Samara.
Germany receives half of Russia’s money and the 6 icps for territory value.

@gen-manstein Got it. Sorry, I think I knew you had your own game based on being on the boards for however many years now. But I guess I wasn’t thinking of it as essentially your own thing almost entirely!

So a lot of my stuff probably wasn’t helpful then haha.

So I see your conundrum then, as that’s the Soviet players’ only Major Factory possibility, since they’re only available on capitals. Not sure you’d want to do this, but you could just say that the turn Moscow falls, the Soviets can rebuild for free a Major Factory on the site of their new capital (Samara), but that this is only a one time thing? You could avoid different money scenarios that way that I listed above. That seems maybe “too easy” to have done though.

Your game sounds great.