Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

Dumb sub question….

Axis & Allies Global 1940

1.2k

P

Plasticdeathbydice
last edited by

One fighter and one Dest. attack one sub.

Both attack rolls miss

Defend roll hits and kills Dest.

Since Dest. is now dead, Sub can submerge and combat ends, right?

Got into an arguement, and would like third party feedback….
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
C

calvinhobbesliker
last edited by

Ftr can’t hit sub without destroyer, so combat ends
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
F

Fishmoto37 '10
last edited by

@Plasticdeathbydice:

One fighter and one Dest. attack one sub.

Both attack rolls miss

Defend roll hits and kills Dest.

Since Dest. is now dead, Sub can submerge and combat ends, right?

Got into an arguement, and would like third party feedback….

Durn lucky sub, hitting on a roll of one.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
P

Plasticdeathbydice
last edited by

Lucky indeed….thats is why I have never had this question before…sub always dies…
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0

Featured Topics

League rules idea: mulligans for patrons

Guadalcanal Tournament at Strategicon (Los Angeles) Feb. 17, 2024

T-shirts, Hats, and More

global 1940

181

anniversary

1914

1942 2nd ed

tips&tricks

bm3

video

axis & allies

Suggested Topics

I

Scramble question. *important *

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • internationalaw

3

0
Votes

3
Posts

1.1k
Views

W

wittmann is right, the Italians can’t participate in the German attack so they are bystanders. By rule the German transport should endure one round of combat, then it can retreat if still alive (unless you are playing a friendly game and allow the German player to rethink his move based on the new info).
C

SBR question?

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Commando Brado

2

0
Votes

2
Posts

768
Views

V

yes
T

Question on team arrangements

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • TheMethuselah

15

0
Votes

15
Posts

2.6k
Views

W

@IKE:

Another option in a 2v2 live game is to split the Allies up by theater, which we like to do.

Allies player 1: US (Atlantic), UK (London), Russia, France
Allies player 2: US (Pacific), UK (Calcutta), Anzac, China

Ofcourse this involves heavy coordination in strategy of spending US $. It’s give and take.

We have done this in the past, and it is pretty cool. The 2 US players lobbying for income/units is kinda what happened historically (which theater gets a boost?). Does the Pac player allow the Siberians to march home? Dose India give up some air/fleet to Egypt? This gives the Euro and Pac allied players something to do throughout the game, and coordination is a must. Some of their powers are in the fight from the get go, some are dwindling, and others are ramping up.

On the Pac side, US controlling Anzac seems right because they need to work together once the US gets into the game. As China/India looses ground the US picks up steam so that player is involved throughout.

On the Euro side the UK gets a lot of action as do the French (turn one). The US/Russia comes into play slowly, and you don’t want someone to have only the US/Russia because of that.

In our group Russia is an inept power to play because it can be very boring unless there is a Sea lion. There is nothing good about playing the US/Russia, waiting for 3 rounds to go by, and the game is paused until the next day lol. Even when we split the allies up differently, Russia is a bit of a question. Sometimes we alternate Russia’s turn between both allied players.
Q

G42 question

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • questioneer

7

0
Votes

7
Posts

1.9k
Views

N

I think what also helped the USA in the Pacific was the type of war it was; wasn’t the majority of the Japanese land forces fighting in China? The USA could use their wealth of equipment and air-power to good use this way.

I like the idea of the different start-ups and scenarios and maybe more victory conditions for the Global Games.

I don’t think WW2 Axis & Allies games are dead either; I like the idea of more Theater type games as well like:
Eastern Front (have lots of territories; maybe make good use of rail-roads and blitzkrieg tactics etc… have extra "special infantry to represent the SS and other stuff)
Stalingrad would be cool…
Kursk would be cool…

Maybe some form of Atlantic Battles (subs vs convoys etc…)
Maybe some form of Battle of Britain (air battles) or some form of Bombing strategy game of the allies vs Germany (air battles).

I think there’s lots of games and ways they could still go.
Y

Questions about bids and balance

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Young Grasshopper

21

0
Votes

21
Posts

3.3k
Views

E

knp7765

Axis and allies has changed over the decades I have been playing. Probably 30 years. But one thing has not, the basics. And it makes sense since they are trying to stay true to what happened, in the sense of what the situation really was at a given point in time. Thereby, the fact remains that the real action is in Europe and whoever wins Europe wins the war.

Britain and Russia cannot, unless playing a weak German player hold off the Germans long enough for Japan to be neutralize much less defeated. And if they could, then the resources spent on neutralizing Japan only means the allies would have won much earlier if those resources were spent in Europe.

Now before everyone goes crazy on me and makes arguments that you just can’t completely and totally ignore Japan and give me all kinds of examples on how the old KGF strategy would not work in the newest editions, understand, I am not arguing a complete ignore of Japan, only enough resources to help Anzac, India, and China slow them down. Essentially, defensive in the Pacific and the offensive in Europe.

That part of the game has not changed EXCEPT, that with the Victory cities only requiring Japan to hold 6 of them, forces the US to go offensive in the Pacific.

That is why I do not like it. It forces in unrealistic and ineffective strategy.
W

Question

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • WW11commander

17

0
Votes

17
Posts

2.4k
Views

S

@RedHunter:

@soulfein:

@Zhukov44:

Why bother if I’m not serious about the Sea Lion bluff and USA can buy bombers to reinforce London anyway?

to deny uk investing early in middle east, thus giving ita a real chance to make 30+ early on, instead of getting convoyd out of the game without doing anything at all.

plus the initial naval investment (ac+trans) actually helps ger against barb, enabling ger to have a solid stack drinking in novgorod g3.

Invest with what fleet lol? UK fleet should be gone turn 1. Its not that hard to sink it. Just use fighters and fleet correctly. And if you want to annoy the UK take Scotland turn 2. But build armor for Russia. 1 tech token and 4 armor…best German 1 build I have found for Alpha 3. You are not going to be able to pull off Sealion unless the UK is stupid and even if you pull it off you bring USA into the war a turn early for which Japan is not thankful to you. You won’t normally be able to hold the UK and build enough for Russia, depending on turn 1 USA builds. If they think you are going to sealion you can bet they are going to build to counter turn 1.

I have said this before and I will say it again. If France doesn’t fall and the UK has fleet left you can pretty much call the game turn 1. It digs Germany into a huge hole they have a hard time recovering from.

sigh those transports plus ac built in g1 is not for sealion it s for reinforcing barbarossa… with that build u can stack novgorod in g3 - fastest way to make money from barb with ger.

meant uk can invest in middle east (factories + newly purchased land/naval units), ofc ger should hit uk navy in g1 that s a no brainer.

taking scotland on turn2 doesnt help barbarossa at all.

slightly off topic, usa is already in war in 2nd round max if u want to threaten a pac win, so sealion doesnt interfere with that.

if allies think ger s going for sealion and build to counter it, that s all the better for axis, since it means barbarossa will be much stronger, because allies built against sealion, not barb.
T

Quick Questions

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • The Fire Knight

4

0
Votes

4
Posts

1.0k
Views

G

all 3. REALLY sure NO
P

German sub buy…..

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Plasticdeathbydice

6

0
Votes

6
Posts

1.9k
Views

J

It seems with 6 subs on the board, you could keep 2 off Canada and 4 off London. That means you would subtract 11 IPCs from the UK until the US entered the war, if UK does not build a DD in Canada.

You could keep London at around 18 IPCs until the US enters the war. However, I don’t think Germany can spare the money on sea units, since I believe they need to help Japan gather victory cities or face a long term loss of game. I also suspect that the US will have 2-3 DDs in their war fleet able to clear two of the convoy zones for UK.

Personally I would make air units over sea units, as you can then threaten fleets and land units especially if you need a quick extra “push” against Moscow early on.

You would discourage a navy build by UK until the US could arrive on scene.

In some Europe games, I did produce a couple of subs early on, but not in any global games. I found their life span to be brief unless they hid behind Denmark.

50

Online

17.8k

Users

40.5k

Topics

1.8m

Posts