If AH released a more up-to-date FAQ, lead me too it! Kreighund’s link takes me to a designer site - not an official Avalon Hill source.
AFAIK this proposed errata was never published by the producers of the game; who have the
finalonly “official” word.That thread (not even a PDF anymore) is about as official as LHTR for Revised. These are fine option for so inclined tournament organisers, but they do not supplant the official rules.
As I said, the publisher has dropped support for out-of-print games, so the designer’s site is the only official source of information for them that currently exists (save for disconnected web pages). In any case, the FAQs that AH publishes come from the designer, and the ones on his site are the same as the ones that are (or used to be) on the publisher’s site.
This is kind of academic, seeing as AH FAQ & HGD FAQ are on the same page…
But I would argue that IF AH had not officially endorsed that FAQ it would not be official. Dropping support is kind of irrelevant. Star Wars: Queens Gambit is oop and unsupported - that doesn’t mean the designers can make “official” changes to the rules. Rather it means the official rules are set in stone.
Again, this is academic. WotC got behind HGD 100%. If AH chose not to recognise the change, then we’d have a fun debate!
:roll:
Be cool man.
:-P
I had good cause to believe AH had not officially endorsed this rule - the FAQ link I followed came from this site!
When a designer retroactively wants to change a game rule after it’s published, and the publisher (apparently) does not acknowledge the change - it’s a very reasonable and defensible position that the publisher has the official word.
It’s not by fault AA.org has an out of date link and WotC has taken their link down. No need for the eye-rolls, they’re not very friendly. :)
If the designer wants to change a rule then he has the final say. It’s his game. I’ll need as much as I need to.
question about turkey, can you pass trough the dardanelles into the black sea or not? I can not seem to find it in the rulebook :? :?
question about turkey, can you pass trough the dardanelles into the black sea or not? I can not seem to find it in the rulebook :? :?
From what I remember it’s optional with most people playing that you can’t.
question about turkey, can you pass trough the dardanelles into the black sea or not? I can not seem to find it in the rulebook :? :?
It has been added to the original edition as one of the “Additional Optional Rules” (as part of the Official FAQ):
@AA50:
Dardanelles Closed to Sea Movement
In order to maintain its neutrality, Turkey closed the narrow straits linking the Black Sea and the
Mediterranean, permitting no naval passage by any belligerent nation on either side. No sea units may
move into or out of sea zone 16, however air units may move through this sea zone freely.
From what I remember it’s optional with most people playing that you can’t.
Right. Yes, this game came out about 9 years ago, but I remember the '41 scenario was tilted toward the Axis but if you played (it was optional, you are right) with the Dardanelles closed, that went a long way toward making '41 fair. Letting Italy hammer directly on Russia (The Caucasus IIRC) is brutal to the Allies.
This being a reprint, the FAQ still applies, so feel free to use the optional rules in the FAQ.
apologies for not going thru 72 pages of this thread (or even doing a search), flog my lazy a$$ for that :-o
Can I non-combat a sub into a SZ that contains a Destroyer and immediately submerge? I know I have to stop in a SZ with a destroyer (can not pass thru), but not sure just moving into the same SZ as the DD would always require combat if I wanted to enter and dive without a battle.
Thank you!
Yes, you can non-com a sub into a fleet including a destroyer and there will never be any combat - the conduct combat phase is past.
And no one is expected to go through the past posts, so there will be no flogging.
Can I non-combat a sub into a SZ that contains a Destroyer and immediately submerge?
You can non-combat move into that SZ but you cannot submerge. Submerging is done during Conduct Combat Phase. Also a Destroyer cancels the Submersible ability of subs.
Combat would result in case the move happened during Combat Move Phase.
@P@nther:
Can I non-combat a sub into a SZ that contains a Destroyer and immediately submerge?
You can non-combat move into that SZ but you cannot submerge. Submerging is done during Conduct Combat Phase. Also a Destroyer cancels the Submersible ability of subs.
Combat would result in case the move happened during Combat Move Phase.
So when would the ensuing combat occur? Does it necessarily happen during the next Conduct Combat phase, or does it only occur if the active power has combat to conduct in that zone?
Can I sketch some scenarios?
1. G sub moves into SZ with UK DD.
on next (UK) turn, can they move DD out of that zone, avoiding combat? If so, is that a combat move or a non-combat move?
2. G sub moves into SZ with US DD.
on next (UK) turn, if they have no units in (and move no units into) that SZ, does combat still occur between the G sub and US DD? Can the UK move through that space and ignore the sub, even though it is not ‘submerged?’
@P@nther:
Can I non-combat a sub into a SZ that contains a Destroyer and immediately submerge?
You can non-combat move into that SZ but you cannot submerge. Submerging is done during Conduct Combat Phase. Also a Destroyer cancels the Submersible ability of subs.
Combat would result in case the move happened during Combat Move Phase.So when would the ensuing combat occur? Does it necessarily happen during the next Conduct Combat phase, or does it only occur if the active power has combat to conduct in that zone?
Can I sketch some scenarios?
1. G sub moves into SZ with UK DD.
on next (UK) turn, can they move DD out of that zone, avoiding combat? If so, is that a combat move or a non-combat move?2. G sub moves into SZ with US DD.
on next (UK) turn, if they have no units in (and move no units into) that SZ, does combat still occur between the G sub and US DD? Can the UK move through that space and ignore the sub, even though it is not ‘submerged?’
Combat is initiated by the power moving during Combat Move Phase. It is resolved during the Conduct Combat Phase immediately after the Combat Move Phase.
Scenario 1: Here the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Sea Zones” rules apply (rulebook page 14). The UK destroyer moves from a hostile sea zone to escape combat as its combat move (also on page 13), then.
Scenario 2: In case Germany moves the sub into the SZ during Combat Move Phase, combat occurs during Germany’s Conduct Combat Phase.
In case Germany moves the sub there during Noncombat Move Phase no combat occurs, as this is not a Combat Move and the Conduct Combat Phase is over for that German turn. UK can move through that space simply ignoring the German sub - (the German sub can’t be submerged, as submerging takes place only during Conduct Combat Phase). When it comes to US’ turn, US can choose to engage the sub or not.
@P@nther:
@P@nther:
Can I non-combat a sub into a SZ that contains a Destroyer and immediately submerge?
You can non-combat move into that SZ but you cannot submerge. Submerging is done during Conduct Combat Phase. Also a Destroyer cancels the Submersible ability of subs.
Combat would result in case the move happened during Combat Move Phase.So when would the ensuing combat occur? Does it necessarily happen during the next Conduct Combat phase, or does it only occur if the active power has combat to conduct in that zone?
Can I sketch some scenarios?
1. G sub moves into SZ with UK DD.
on next (UK) turn, can they move DD out of that zone, avoiding combat? If so, is that a combat move or a non-combat move?2. G sub moves into SZ with US DD.
on next (UK) turn, if they have no units in (and move no units into) that SZ, does combat still occur between the G sub and US DD? Can the UK move through that space and ignore the sub, even though it is not ‘submerged?’Combat is initiated by the power moving during Combat Move Phase. It is resolved during the Conduct Combat Phase immediately after the Combat Move Phase.
Scenario 1: Here the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Sea Zones” rules apply (rulebook page 14). The UK destroyer moves from a hostile sea zone to escape combat as its combat move (also on page 13), then.
Scenario 2: In case Germany moves the sub into the SZ during Combat Move Phase, combat occurs during Germany’s Conduct Combat Phase.
In case Germany moves the sub there during Noncombat Move Phase no combat occurs, as this is not a Combat Move and the Conduct Combat Phase is over for that German turn. UK can move through that space simply ignoring the German sub - (the German sub can’t be submerged, as submerging takes place only during Conduct Combat Phase). When it comes to US’ turn, US can choose to engage the sub or not.
Ok, so units of two opposing powers can be present in the same SZ without combat, as long as it is not the Conduct Combat phase during one of those powers’ turn? Appreciate the help and your patience.
Ok, so units of two opposing powers can be present in the same SZ without combat, …
All that has been said is covered by the rulebook’s turn order and the destroyer and sub special abilities.
Please see:
@rulebook:
A destroyer cancels the Sub Movement special ability of any enemy submarine that moves into the sea zone with it. This
means that the submarine must immediately end its movement, whether combat or noncombat, upon entering the sea zone. If
a submarine ends its combat movement in a sea zone with an enemy destroyer, combat will result.
@rulebook:
Sub Movement: Submarines treat hostile sea zones as if they were friendly for purposes of both combat and noncombat
movement. However, if a submarine enters a sea zone containing an enemy destroyer, its movement ends immediately. If
it ends its combat move in a hostile sea zone, combat will occur.
Also:
@rulebook:
Phase 5: Noncombat Move
…
Only aircraft and submarines may move through hostile spaces during this phase.
Other (than submarines) ships can’t treat hostile seazones as friendly.
I wanna be like P@nther when I grow up!
What a pro
Hi, naval question.
Japanese attack USA:
I want to know what can happen if USA decides NOT to submerse its submarines.
The USA submarines will have a 1st strike against the Japanese submarine. Let’s assume they miss. After that, the Japanese roll all dice simultaneously (no 1st strike). Suppose all Japanese units strike hits, are USA then allowed to assign all these hits to USA destroyer? The Japanese submarine is capable of hitting a USA submarine, but it is obviously in USA’s interest to assign all hits to the same unit (destroyer). Is that legal?
Hi, naval question.
Japanese attack USA:
- 1 submarine, 3 fighters, 1 bomber (Japanese)
- 2 submarines, 1 destroyer (USA)
I want to know what can happen if USA decides NOT to submerse its submarines.
The USA submarines will have a 1st strike against the Japanese submarine. Let’s assume they miss. After that, the Japanese roll all dice simultaneously (no 1st strike). Suppose all Japanese units strike hits, are USA then allowed to assign all these hits to USA destroyer? The Japanese submarine is capable of hitting a USA submarine, but it is obviously in USA’s interest to assign all hits to the same unit (destroyer). Is that legal?
No, it is not.
@rulebook:
As many hits as possible must be assigned. For instance, if 1 cruiser and
2 submarines attack a carrier with a fighter and score 3 hits, the defender must assign
the cruiser hit to the fighter and the submarine hits to the carrier. The defender may not
assign the cruiser hit to the carrier, as the subs cannot hit the fighter and 1 sub hit would
be lost.
So the Japanese submarine’s hit must be assigned to a US submarine, as the Japanese air units can only hit the US destroyer.
