@Baron:

@Caesar:

@Bob77:

Nope. Facility aa only fires at the bombers directly attacking it. Unit aa guns only fire if their territory is being attacked.
Side note, it would be cool if aa could chose to defend air or ground combat. Like german 88s being used as anti tank guns and 20mm being used against infantry and lite vehicles. Oh well. Back to the game.

Right but AnA will never have a version where each unit has its own attack against certain units. I do think about AA guns should have the ability to shoot at infantry on defense. Each nation in WWII AA guns could be aimed at the ground and I am sure you can find evidence of everyone doing it at some point.

AnA will never try to have a unit that can do better or worse against different units. IE fighters rolling a 3 against other fighters but a 1 against a battleship and G40’s rules for fighters on strategic bombing doesn’t count.

Submarines (and Destroyer somehow vs Sub) and AAA got special targeting. And these units saw various changes.
I saw no outright evidence against more room about special targeting. Do you ?

@ShadowHAwk:

@Caesar:

@ShadowHAwk:

@BusaRider29:

@Caesar:

So unless you’re going to put at least 6 ICP’s worth of units, their is no point breaking that bonus.

Good point.

Questionalble, would you allow a bomber to station there 1 round if it can take out 1-2 japan transports for free?

Sure the 5 NO is annoying but slowing japan down again is also good as more US stuff goes towards germany afterwards.

Not unless USSR has the advantage against western Axis and my reason for this is that USSR cannot defend the east and the NO for Lend-Lease will almost be used against Germany so I am not letting US have it easier because I can’t.

Its a team game for the allies remember.

If your actively helping japan as russia by protecing their transports then US will need to spend more against japan which means less against italy and germany.
Which will result in more germans hitting russia.

Yes however if Germany and USSR play a “perfect game”, Germany regardless will beat USSR in G40 which is why USSR not only has to rely on Lend Lease but also need physically help from the allies. So in this sense, it cripples USSR to allow US to move into its country if those same units are not going to stop western Axis who already have a win over USSR. And taking into account that US with all of there NO can already outspend Japan from J1 even helps my case in this situation.

@simon33:

@Caesar:

I get that now. And I’m not here to argue with the rules one bit. I am saying it’s stupid and I am sure people agree with that. However, again, I understand why the rule exist.

It’s stupid but you understand why it exists? Hmm…

Yeah, it’s stupid that nation without a government can’t lend its territory to its allies. We saw this in WWII with African colonies that refused to serve Vichy France nor Germany in there occupied parents. However, I also can see why for the sake of the game, you can’t just walk into your allies and then annex there income, the Allies would have the greatest advantage of just converting French territory.

@Fiera:

… he had not purchased ground units on Germany and moved all troops to Slovakia.

In this specific case there where no units present to be picked up.

@GeneralHandGrenade:

Oh boy, you had to bring that one up again. We had a lengthy debate over that one. In the end it was proven (and certified) that you could indeed park your Japanese fleet in SZ 26.
Goofy=Yes
Illegal=No

It’s no longer up for debate. That one is settled.

Hi GHG, sorry for starting this and I accept the forums statement of beeing legal.
(Sidenote, at the same moment we established a house rule that says, the Japanese cannot do that on our table!  :-P)

@taamvan:

I should clarify n correct my past comments re how the bid is used in tournaments;  In tournaments; you can only buy units with the bid.  You cannot buy bases or factories (right away), and you cant save money.

However, at Gencon/Origins/Smorey Swamp TN, you can put all the units in one square.   This apparently didn’t come up in the earlier tournament in 2016, but no-one there objected to putting the higher bids all in one square in 2017, which is not really a problem in most editions but it adds some choices when the bid is higher.

42.2 average bids 7-12 to Allies
G42 average bids 0 to either
Classic automatic bid of 9 to Axis
G40 no tourney bid that I know of but bids average 8-20 in league

Since the bid is a house rule, you can apply it however you like.   The bid should be a game changer.   The bids that place a fighter into the German open or a sub (or 2) into Taranto change the game and change blowout battles into more equal contests.

That is interesting that in tournaments you are not allowed to save money.

Like I said earlier, the main reason I like to save most of the bid has to do with the fact that the UK will know where it needs to focus its resources much better at the start of its second round compared to round 1.  Although I will admit a sub for the Med and fighter on Scotland is very good value and tough to beat.

It’s the same reason why China doesn’t have its own fighter or artillery. They were just being cheap which is why I bought five artillery and the old p40 from the original AnA and painted them Chinese Green.

I mean the destroyer + aircraft rule isn’t exclusive to attack as combined arms likes to make it seem.

If the idea is to control southern USSR and let northern USSR alone with a IC Romania then you should really debate about going after Persia and then decide to go east to India or west to Egypt.

@Gargantua:

The rulebook is half clear.  It states that all combat moves must end in combat on Page #13
Sea units that will be participating in an amphibious
assault from a friendly sea zone, as well as sea and/or
air units that may be needed to support it in the case that
defending air units are scrambled (see �Scramble,� page16).

My interpretation of that is scramble or no scramble, or even no airbase, I can move whatever I want in the combat phase to a friendly seazone to support that invasion.

Your interpretation is incorrect.  You may only move units that will participate in or support the amphibious assault into a friendly sea zone.  Air and sea units that will participate in the assault include transports offloading land units, battleships and/or cruisers bombarding, and possibly a warship to escort the transports (if needed because of an enemy sub that will be ignored - bombarding battleships and/or cruisers can fulfill this role).  Supporting units can include any type of air or sea unit desired, but can only be moved there if necessary due to the possibility of a defending scramble - there being both an operative enemy air base and eligible air units present.

As others have pointed out, the same criteria apply when determining whether units beginning the turn in the sea zone may move out of it during combat movement.  Such units restricted from moving out in noncombat movement are those that were actually involved in combat and transports that offloaded.

Just FYI it also ejects any Allied control markers (so if the USA controlled Shan State because you did not have a capital at the time, as soon as you liberate, the USA marker is ejected and it returns to UK control).

This is true of Paris too, so it resets all blue areas back to French ownership upon liberation if they were “liberated” Allied at that time.

for j1 to work imo you have to take out pearl harbor…
pot shot at Anzac destroyer in sz62…
take out Philippines…
take out uk battleship…
no allied ships when done…really nice
just means money islands turn 3

@hcp:

Zhukov, might I ask that, under such FIC/Hainan naval base case, are there conditions that you would still consider stacking Yunnan using the remaining troops (ANZAC, Russia, Chinese, … and potential the 4 UK mech)?  I wish to see if there are other ways to delay the J5 India fall (by land).

This depends on many factors, including what Japan and USA are doing (is USA going KJF?, did Japan move all their land units south or are they keeping some units up north to face Siberians?, are the Japanese stacked at Human or Kweichow?).  Generally speaking, it’s more important to defend India.  But if you can defend India and still stack Yunnan, it might be worth it.  You don’t need 50/50 odds, in many cases, especially in kjf, it’s still worth stacking Yunnan if Japan attacking Yunnan will result in a net negative tuv exchange.  But note that if you take this risk (inviting a high-risk Japanese attack) you can’t assume these fighters on Yunnan will be available to you later to defend Moscow.

It seems to me that if Japan wants India bad enough it’s usually possible for them to take it on J5, but that comes at a cost if Japan needs to spend resources on naval and air bases and neglect securing the crucial money islands to do so.

Counter attack is better.  Take islands, you can keep big fleet on Phil or buy airbase naval french Indochina… Up to you. You want minor fic anyway. I honestly don’t care if USA parks on Japan… Kind of what happens when Japan takes over india, because all the air and transports slam it… Unless India retreated away then yeah USA won’t get to do that.

yeah, but we are still fooling around with new-ish ideas after a years break for Gencon 2017 42.2 so its not just–->  deathblow

You may still want to send the overkill as interception scrambles are becoming more and more common and so sending extra bombers to hit the bases (or just the factory) and also tacs and fighters is smart as free casualties, and overkill is a method of deterrence, not just damage-dealing.

The total power/money imbalance (Ger v USSR) of the Dark Skies is so great that guaranteeing the 20 damage on Moscow must be worth 1 bomber lost per run, because our house players consistently bomb Moscow into dust turn after turn losing 1 bomber on average per round (to AAA and interception).

Another issue is that they are out of print–they remain popular in the Tournaments and so they are even re-building starters/boosters I believe (by re-bagging the correct rarities of the available loose pieces) because the sealed boxes ran out a few years ago.

@Bob_A_Mickelson:

I’ve been looking to add these custom IPC poker chips to spruce up my game, however they are quite expensive.

http://iwillnevergrowup.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=50

How many poker chips do I need for global 1940? Will I need more than one set? What is your guys experience?

Thanks in advance.

I have the set too… I also found the default set a bit short… if I’m not mistaken, I have the default set, two sets of the 25IPC add-ons, and I custom-ordered an extra ten 10IPC chips (as mentioned by others, contact IWNGU directly to get IPCs in a non-set fashion, as I did by ordering extra 10IPC chips).

Bottom line, I was happy with the number of 1s and 5s in the default set, but needed more 10s, and got two sets of the 25s.

1. Yes, tacs can only bomb airfields and naval bases.
2. Perhaps the CV as a landing site has already had its capacity used up by other moves you have made?

If the fighters die, Taranto is weakened.

Its a small exaggeration, a couple of my bombers always die, you’re going to want 6.  And I agree with you im building mechs and tanks and going east.

Gargantua said hes buying 6 tanks with Russia, I haven’t tried that.  Seems like so few infantry you only have like 20-23? or so to start with its tiny.

I’m going to get routed south in my current game (167 Axis) but im still going to take novogrod on G3 with ease, whatever his posture that’s a gimme.  Italy has 3 tanks and 3 mechs on the continent.  Attacking the Syrian air  stack left after Taranto wasn’t a good idea I lost 2 bombers.