@MidSpeck:

But note that it’s pointing out that enemy antiaircraft guns are still owned by the enemy, regardless of which order you decide to resolve the battles.  In other words, you cannot go conquer a territory and take over its antiaircraft gun before your other planes fly over.  Why is this important in this case?  Because you capture antiaircraft guns just like you capture industrial complexes.  So if hostile antiaircraft guns always get to shoot, then I could argue that the factories always get bombed while still being hostile as well.

Excellent observation! This is exactly what my opponent argued as well and with the simultaneous time frame principle in the rules this is what I would believe to be true as well (rather than Japan attacking its own IC). Of course I’m playing devil’s advocate here, so let’s follow this line of thought and assume that indeed the rocket attack involves the AA-gun targeting a Russian IC (even though on the board there is already a Japanese control marker in Moscow).

@LHTR:

In addition, you collect all unspent IPCs from the former owner of the captured capital. For
example, if Germany conquers Moscow while the Soviet Union�s player is holding 18 IPCs, these are immediately transferred to Germany�s player.

Notice the IPCs are transferred immediately as Japan takes control of the territory. This means Russia has no cash on hand anymore when the Rocket Strike is resolved.
@LHTR:

The opponent must surrender that many IPCs to the bank (or as many as the player has,
whichever is the lesser amount).

The player controlling Russia in this scenario is the ‘opponent’ in this battle. Russia surrenders 0 IPCs (lesser amount) to the bank. End of combat.

@MidSpeck:

So, since the rules don’t explicitly state what to do, that’s how I would piece together my argument.  Since all combat happens at the same time, the factory gets hit with rockets and I kill all the bad guys, and then I take control of the territory.  Even if you “resolve” it in the other order, you can imagine that’s still what “actually” happened.  The mechanics of the game are there to try and make it simple and this edge case just wasn’t considered.

I agree that it is ‘in the spirit of the rules’ that you’d roll the rocket strike first. It also seems more ‘realistic’, yet this alone cannot be a reason to play that way. There are many very unrealistic things occurring every turn (even the concept of a turn is very unrealistic) and it’s not necessarily the best course of action to explain what happens on the game board with what happens in a real war.

Another situation that is at odds with the simultaneous time frame principle for example is the ability for the attacker to retreat with one force based on the end result of another combat. You could consider this ‘unrealistic’ and ‘not within the spirit of the rules’, but it’s also a clever use of game mechanics that can be used to gain an advantage. It’s a game that you want to win after all.

@Krieghund:

If the strike occurs last, Japan will strike its own IC and lose the IPCs.

Yes! This is exactly what my original question is about: can Japan be its own ‘opponent’? It seems to me the rules are ambiguous in this situation. I can’t find a passage myself that convinces me one way or the other.

@Krieghund:

@Sihrtogg:

Where does it say so in the rules?

In the passage you quoted above: “During the combat move phase, declare which antiaircraft guns are making rocket strikes.”

Declaring and executing are two different things. Any unit you move into battle during the combat move phase is essentially a declaration that said unit is going to be executing an attack during the conduct combat phase. AA-guns don’t move prior to their attack, but you still have to declare the attack in advance.

There is absolutely no indication in the document that suggests the dice roll linked to a rocket strike is rolled during the combat move phase. It’s quite the opposite: in three different locations it is explicitly stated that the die is rolled / the attack occurs during the Conduct Combat phase.

@LHTR:

You attack enemy production with your antiaircraft guns during this step, if you have the Rockets
development, and if you declared the intended rocket attack during the combat move phase. (See
“Rocket Strikes” for more information.)

@LHTR:

Roll one die for the rocket. The result of that roll is the number of IPCs destroyed by that rocket.

@LHTR:

You can attack enemy production with your rockets during the opening fire step of combat.

Furthermore, if — hypothetically — you would roll the die during the Combat Move Phase, wouldn’t that allow the attacker to base the decision what combats to do that turn on the damage dealt by the rockets? This seems really awkward.

@Krieghund:

Rocket strikes are carried out during the Combat Move phase, so they will occur before any standard combat is resolved.

Where does it say so in the rules?

@LHTR:

Weapons Development - Rockets: If you have the Rockets development, your antiaircraft guns
can act as rocket launchers. You can attack enemy production with your rockets during the
opening fire step of combat.

As far as I know there is no opening fire step in the Combat Move phase.

First let me quote some relevant passages from LHTR for reference.

@LHTR:

Rockets
You attack enemy production with your antiaircraft guns during this step, if you have the Rockets
development, and if you declared the intended rocket attack during the combat move phase. (See
“Rocket Strikes” for more information.)

Rocket Strikes
If you have the Rockets development, your antiaircraft guns can act as rocket launchers. You can
conduct an economic attack against an enemy industrial complex to ‘destroy’ IPCs.
During the combat move phase, declare which antiaircraft guns are making rocket strikes. There
is no defense against this attack. From each territory, one antiaircraft gun may attack an industrial
complex within 3 spaces, though each industrial complex may be attacked by only one rocket
launcher in a turn.
Roll one die for the rocket. The result of that roll is the number of IPCs destroyed by that rocket.
The maximum combined damage inflicted in one turn by all strategic bombing raids on one
industrial complex and any rocket attack on the same industrial complex is the territory’s income
value. The opponent must surrender that many IPCs to the bank (or as many as the player has,
whichever is the lesser amount).

Step 8: Concluding Combat
If you win a combat as the attacker in a territory and you have one or more surviving land units
there, you take control of it, otherwise it remains in the defender’s control.
(…)
Any antiaircraft gun or industrial complex in the captured territory remains there but now belongs
to your alliance

OK so here we go. Let’s say Moscow is under attack twice from Japan: once from a rocket attack and once with a regular attack (just 1 sneaky tank blitzing in with some air support, with a small yet worthwhile chance to capture Moscow). This double attack is legal under LHTR and are seen as two separate combats. My question is regarding the order these two combats are resolved as chosen by the active player.

On regular IC captures with rockets, you roll the economic attack first (while the IC is still Russian controlled) then capture the IC to avoid any problems. However, in this case where you might capture Moscow and collect all remaining Russian money things get complicated. The attacker can choose what combat he wants to resolve first. Suppose he picks the regular combat first, before the rocket attack.

If Russia defends Moscow, then the rocket does damage as usual.

If Japan captures Moscow, what happens to the rocket attack?

• Is it cancelled?
• Does it attack the IC as if it was still Russian? (but it will do no damage because Russia has no money)
• Does it do damage to Japan? (which at that point will have the Russian money on hand)

Just posting to see if anyone is up for a game of AAR (2004) Enhanced variant. Will play regular dice or Low-Luck.

axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=11203.0

If you’ve never played it but are curious I’m happy to play an introductory game also.

Under LHTR rules:

Land Combat Withdrawals (excluding amphibious assaults) :
Retreat all attacking land units in that combat to a single adjacent friendly territory from which at
least one of the attacking land units entered. All such units must retreat together to the same
territory.

When retreating all attacking units to a territory, is it required that at least one unit of those retreating units came from that territory, or can all units which came from that direction be dead and still allow the other units to retreat there?
LHTR is usually very explicit, but in this case neither is explicitly written down. In the above quoted text the first instance of ‘attacking land units’ refers to ‘surviving attacking land units’ because I doubt I can actually retreat ‘all attacking land units’ (even the ones dead). But should the second instance of ‘attacking land units’ be read as ‘attacking land units (including the ones killed in action)’ or also as the same aforementioned ‘surviving attacking land units’?

For example:

Japan attacks Kazakh (defended by 4 Russian inf) with 3inf from Sinkiang and 4arm from Persia. If the Russian inf score 3 hits and Japan scores less than 4 hits, can Japan choose 3 inf as casualties and retreat 4arm to Sinkiang? Or must he choose 2inf + arm as casualties to be allowed to retreat inf + 3arm to Sinkiang?

If you like playing with NAs and picking them to suit your strategy, give Axis and Allies Revised Enhanced (commonly abbreviated as AARe) a try. It uses National Advantages as an important part of core play, not just an optional rule. They’re considered well-balanced after several years of development and play-testing.

It appears I can’t post links, but you’ll find the sticky in the House Rules section on this forum.

Have fun.

I’m new to Play by Forum, but it seems really suited for Low Luck (only 1 die per side per combat cycle)

Looking for a game of AAR, or even better, AARe.
If you haven’t heard about Enhanced yet, have a look in the house rules forum, it’s amazing.