Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory? The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States. You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.
I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.
Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable. Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.
It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency. If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue. Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.
Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)
-
Thanks!
I just wanted to make sure!
-
Welcome to the boards, Aaron - feel free to ask your rules questions here any time you have any doubts or wonderings.
-
Thanks Gamerman,
I have been a long time reader - but I just recently signed up. I’m glad to be here. Everyone I have encountered so far has been very helpful. :-D
-
Thanks Gamerman,
I have been a long time reader - but I just recently signed up. I’m glad to be here. Everyone I have encountered so far has been very helpful. :-D
Great to hear.
-
This may have been asked, but would like clarification on kamikaze rules. It was my understanding that an amphibious assault IN one of the designated sea zones could trigger an attack IF there were eligible unit involved in an attack on units in that zone or an amphibious assault was occurring IN that sea zone. Using tripleA, noticed that sending a transport from z35 to another zone for an amphibious assault (Only a transport) it triggered the kamikaze attack on the remaining ships in z35.
I feel this is inaccurate, but wanted clarification.
Thank you.
-
You’re right.
Kamikazes can only target surface warships, so if there are no surface warships then kamikazes cannot be used. -
Been away from the game for some time and just recently bought the second editions. Convoy Disruption Question: Am I reading this right? The rule book states, “The sea zone must be adjacent to one or more of YOUR controlled territories.” Is this in the pretense of me being attacked or myself the aggressor, because why would you disrupt a convoy adjacent to your own territory? Just reads unassumingly. Also, “At least one warship belonging to a power you are at war with must be in the sea zone.” Can you no longer disrupt convoy sea zones that are devoid of enemy ships? Also if there were enemy ships in the convoy wouldn’t a battle engagement precede the convoy disruption?
-
Same as OOB you just check convoy zones for enemy ships in the Collect Income phase.
On YOUR turn, you might lose income if ENEMY ships (and carrier based planes and tacs) are in convoy zones adjacent to YOUR territories.
It is independent of conventional naval combat. If an enemy ship is in your convoy zone after your combat phase (because it’s in the collect income phase at the end of your turn), you might lose income (depends on dice)
-
Thanks Gamer, that’s what I thought, just read a little funny to me from the rule book.
-
@RogertheShrubber:
Thanks Gamer, that’s what I thought, just read a little funny to me from the rule book.
No problem
That did answer all your convoy questions, then?
-
Yes,thanks
-
Thank you Gamermon for the clarification.
-
 Using tripleA, noticed that sending a transport from z35 to another zone for an amphibious assault (Only a transport) it triggered the kamikaze attack on the remaining ships in z35.
Hi kilroynothere ,
in which version of TripleA the error occurs?
Please send a PM or maybe the savefile with a notice to Veqryn and his team, so they can fix it in the next TripleA version! -
I need clarity on the Allies landing planes in Dutch territories…
-
Can an Allied plane land in Dutch territory on Non-Com movement if not yet taken by a land unit from either Axis or Allies (still orange)
-
Can an Allied plane land on Non-Com movement in a newly “converted” Dutch territory. (just converted fronm Orange on the same non-com turn.
Again, the rule book does not clearly state, but says: [British/Anz] may, however, move units into Dutch territories as a noncombat movement at any time, as long as those territories have not been captured by an Axis power.
-
-
I need clarity on the Allies landing planes in Dutch territories…
- Can an Allied plane land in Dutch territory on Non-Com movement if not yet taken by a land unit from either Axis or Allies (still orange)
YES
- Can an Allied plane land on Non-Com movement in a newly “converted” Dutch territory. (just converted fronm Orange on the same non-com turn.
YES
-
Dutch territories are treated exactly the same as any other territory that is
a) friendly
b) lost their capitol.The only difference between Dutch territories and say, French territories after Paris has been lost, is that the UK/Anzac have a special relationship that allows them to take control of them before they’ve been captured by moving a ground unit into it. Typically you need to capture - this is the one of the two instances where control of a friendly territory passes to a friendly power. The other instance is a neutral that has been attacked but not captured.
So when you’re confused about things, ask yourself how you’d treat normandy if it were still french.
Can you UK/Anzac/US/Russia land a plane there? Yes, as long as it started the turn friendly and they’re not neutral. Exactly the same as any other friendly territory.
The US is not barred from being in a dutch territory - they must be at war first, but then they’re allowed to move into it just like any other friendly territory.
-
I need clarity on the Allies landing planes in Dutch territories…
- Can an Allied plane land in Dutch territory on Non-Com movement if not yet taken by a land unit from either Axis or Allies (still orange)
YES
- Can an Allied plane land on Non-Com movement in a newly “converted” Dutch territory. (just converted fronm Orange on the same non-com turn.
YES
Thank you.
-
In the 2E Europe rulebook on page 39, under global’s “Additional Rules” I notice the United States starts with three minor industrial complexes that get upgrade when the US enters the war.
This is the final version of that rule from Alpha, correct? I remember it being changed back and forth a couple of times.
-
In the 2E Europe rulebook on page 39, under global’s “Additional Rules” I notice the United States starts with three minor industrial complexes that get upgrade when the US enters the war.
This is the final version of that rule from Alpha, correct? I remember it being changed back and forth a couple of times.
yes this is correct for global 1940 2nd Edition!
-
I have started a game with my son, can I build a major IC in Manchuria for Japan even though it has a China symbol on it? I know Japan starts with Manchuria.
Suggested Topics
