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).

Group defense of sea zones using island airbase ?

Axis & Allies Global 1940

1.5k

M

MarkVIIIMarc
last edited by

Let’s say the US and ANZAC both have fighters on US Hawaii which has a functional Airbase and the US only has naval units in the water around it.

When the Japanese attack do both the US and ANZAC get to launch fighters in defense of the US fleet?

Thanks in advance of this problem coming up!
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
C

calvinhobbesliker
last edited by

Yes
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
M

MarkVIIIMarc
last edited by

Calvin you are FAST

Do you have your cell phone set to notify you of new posts somehow?
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
M

MarkVIIIMarc
last edited by

and thanks btw
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
C

calvinhobbesliker
last edited by

I’m just online all the time I’m not at school or sleeping
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
G

Gargantua Liaison TripleA '11 '10
last edited by

So thats why your not posting your move… right. forgot.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
C

calvinhobbesliker
last edited by

@Gargantua:

So thats why your not posting your move… right. forgot.

I was busy posting moves for my other 2 games
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
G

Gargantua Liaison TripleA '11 '10
last edited by

:) mmhmm
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
C

calvinhobbesliker
last edited by

@Gargantua:

:) mmhmm

I just finished my move.
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

H

Unit Starting in a Hostile Sea Zone 110

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • HGC

5

1
Votes

5
Posts

309
Views

P

@HGC

I see, however you are correct. The “Sea Units Starting in Enemy-Occupied Sea Zones” - rules add to the regular Combat Move rules - they don’t suspend them.
A

Sea zone 126 and Finland

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • AldoRaine

5

0
Votes

5
Posts

623
Views

A

@Krieghund thanks for the clarification. Love the game.
W

Most efficient Axis Turn 1 for Sea Lion option

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • weddingsinger

34

1
Votes

34
Posts

3.2k
Views

T

killed 106 +1
They did taranto or the planes cannot return +2
you killed both their fleets and the only ship left they have is a dd and or ca +2
they bought fewer than 6 infantry +1
they bought fewer than 4 pieces on london +2
you stratbombed them and were successful (15+ damage) +1

if you do not scale at least 5 on this matrix I would decline the SL. I scored a 7 and was still at risk of losing UK the entire rest of the game.

Buying ships telegraphs the sea lion. save your money instead. Buy the entire stack as a surprise on the second turn and only if thing are favorable.
Y

Buying and using submarines

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Young Grasshopper

54

0
Votes

54
Posts

9.1k
Views

T

@weddingsinger All I was trying to say is that parking your US fleet in SZ 6 is a recipe for disaster, when it can be in every space around SZ 6 and be much safer. You can however, park as many subs there as you want because 1) once you control that area, you can screen out destroyers who could come 2) he cant build ships in SZ 6 unless you threaten that build, so any destroyers that are built can be blown up before Japan’s next turn 3) the subs can’t be hit by either kamis or planes, whereas your surface fleet can usually be mopped up by Japan’s abundant air force returning home plus some kamis on the carriers to defeat the air support
Y

The Mediterranean Sea

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • Young Grasshopper

36

0
Votes

36
Posts

6.8k
Views

G

@WILD:

@knp7765:

This is why we modified the Russian NO with our own house rule……

I know this is out of place, but the Russian NO is very much part of an over all Med strat….(one that shouldn’t exist IMO).

Yea, the 3 IPC bonus the Russians get for Italian African territories, and Med islands is ridiculous (it has been a major gripe sense it was introduced). This theater was never a realistic or historic goal for the Russians, and it is exploited way to much as ppl get more familiar with it. This NO was changed partially to boost the Russians if there is a Sea Lion (kinda like a penalty), but now it is being manipulated even w/o Sea Lion.

IMO Finland, The Balkans, The Mid East, and Eastern Europe (Orig German territories) are a realistic goal. I’l even buy Original Italian possession in Europe like Albania, parts of N Italy and maybe even Rome could also be added to the list (but the Americans beat them to it for the most part).

What we are experimenting with (not an original house rule by any means) is that Russia gets a bonus for any Orig German, Orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral , and Pro Allied Neutral territory that Russia is in control of equal to that territories IPC value (could also include True Neutrals activated by the Axis, or liberated by Russia from the Axis). This makes the Italian Med islands worthless, and Libya/Ethiopia hardly worth going after. It will tone down some territory bonuses for the Russians (like Bulgaria), but allows them some new territories to target as well that were more in tune with their goals IMO.

Obviously Finland was a major goal, but so was the Balkans (Bulgaria, Yugo, Romania, maybe Albania, and Greece) especially once they beat back the Germans (like in a Sea Lion attempt, or a failed assault on Moscow). In The Mid East it still allows the Russians to gain NO bonus for control of Iraq (reduced), and now Persia for added income once at war (could be as late as R4 before they could be in either because they have to pause in NW Persia). The NO bonus for Iraq, and Persia could also simulate the lend lease coming up through the Persian Gulf. I know that Persia being Russian isn’t very historical as it was British controlled (Russia did invade what is NW Persia though). My thinking here is that if the UK doesn’t take Persia early (leaving it for Russia), then the Allies are out some English Pounds and a couple of inf needed early on. If Germany does a G3 Barbarossa, then by time Russia gets to Persia it would be Rus4 (6 or more IPCs lost to England if they activated it UK1). It would be a viable target however for the Russians to Liberate Persia from the Axis after going for the Oil Bonus, to get a bonus of their own).

In the event of a Sea Lion (or failed assault on Moscow), the Russians would still get good bonuses for the orig German, orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral, and now some Pro allied Neutral territories in the Balkans & Mid East (average of 2-3 IPCs each). If they crack into Northern Italy, or Greater German territories then their NO bonuses rise even more.

The med island thing is no big deal, since 1 axis plane in SITA stops any russian landing. But, I do like the NO changes you proposed. It should only affect Original axis in Europe, and all neutrals in Europe/Middle-East. (No islands).
D

Sea/Air Battle question.

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • docfav7

17

0
Votes

17
Posts

3.0k
Views

W

@suprise:

Page 18 of the Euro rule book and page 16 of the Pacific rule book
My interp. of this is 1 sub, 1 carr with 2 planes. the sub gets a hit what happens …… the carr is tipped and the planes are in the air if the sub does not fire a second shot then the planes need to land within their movement allowance. If you had 2 subs and they both hit then the carr would go down I would say the planes would get away because subs cant hit air units
Those two pages answer the Q’s for me

The movement allowance is only one when defending. The planes would need to land on an adjacent island, coastal tt, or friendly carrier w/room on board.
J

Best UK defense for Sealion 3 or 4 collaboration

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • jim010

231

0
Votes

231
Posts

36.4k
Views

J

@DutchmanD:

Oh, this is no more ahistoric than Italy being able to take Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and the rest of the Mediteranean when they could even beat the Greek army with their entire military. Not to mention one of the most significant ahistorical flaws of G40, which is that the French troops in Aremain loyal to the Allies for some reason, not Axis Vichy… and, if they are not at war, why are they killing Brits mercilessly on Italy 1? Don’t get me started on the whole “orginally owned” territory nonesense either, the Germans can buld a major IC in Norway and the UK can build one in Malaya, but the Japanses cannot build one in Shanghai; the Japanese were the first to build factories in Shanghai around 1900 after the First Sino-Japanese War, and by 1937, when they fully officially occupied the city, it had more manufacturing power than the rest of Southeast Asia combined! Dice Gods forbid the Japs actually being able to make a major IC in an actual manufacturing center that they originally created :wink:

Ahistoric… hmpf! Nothing like an instant 10 tnps build by the Germans and the dissappearance of essentially the entire Royal Navy in the Spring of 1940 to make you give up on all the historical aspects of the game we love…

All good points, but directed more at game mechanics than historical accuracy. I agree that the production cycle is not accurate to real life, it should take 3-4 turns for a BB to be built, but the game is not made for that scale. All units you can build are placed almost immediately. Both the US and UK fleets are severely nerfed, most likely in order to give the axis a chance that they didn’t have in RL.

As for the other issues, I understand why Vichy is not in the game, you have to draw the line somewhere and Larry choose to add France but have them be inert, while China is also hamstrung. Otherwise you get a community of people clamoring on the BBS from Bulgaria wanting special Bulgarian rules or some other nonsense.

I have played a game where Japan could build a major in China and it did seem overpowered. It was maxed on production and China was quickly swallowed up. It took massive US naval builds and tenuous fighting from India to stall the Japs. Japan was also able to not build many trns in that game and still concentrate on the Pacific islands.

Thanks for going over the Abandon London moves again James. One would assume they became even more potent in A3, have you had the opportunity to try it yet? It’s playing the allies like the Axis, creating the initiative and then keeping it long enough to sack Italy…hopefully.
M

Sea zones and convoy raids - need clarification

Axis & Allies Global 1940
• • • marechallannes

2

0
Votes

2
Posts

1.0k
Views

K

@marechallannes:

Q1: A battleship enters a seazone with a hostile submarine. The sub submerges.

Following the rules, the sub emerges after the combat (that doesn’t take place)

Who controlls the seazone after the battleship owners turn?

Is the sub able to raid the convoy zone in that seazone, or is it impossible, cause the battleship owner “won” the battle and controls the sea zone?

Q2: Does the sub emerges before the collect income phase of the battleship owner and is it able to raid the sea-zone of the battleship-owner?

Q3: A submarine enters a seazone with a hostile submarine. Both sub submerges before any round of combat.

Are both submarines are able to make convoy raids? (For example a UK-sub and a Jap-sub in SZ 37)

1: No power can “control” a seazone. That’s why you don’t mark it. The sub is able to raid, because it remains in the seazone during the collect income phase. Powers occupy a seazone, and a seazone can be hostile, but it’s never really “controlled”. A power can still place units in a seazone adjacent to its factory, regardless of how many enemy units might remain in that seazone (that may even be disrupting a convoy).
2: Yes.
3: Yes, assuming each is present during their respective enemy’s collect income phase (when the disruption occurs).

“Submerging” is simply a term for the option to retreat but remain in the same seazone. It serves no other function, and it does not have any impact on any other phases of a turn. After combat, all subs are effectively no longer submerged.

25

Online

17.8k

Users

40.6k

Topics

1.8m

Posts