2015 League General Discussion Thread

[gamerman01]

Before Alpha3 (which is nearly identical to 2nd edition), there were no dice rolls to determine convoy damage.

It was simply 1 IPC for each destroyer, cruiser, and battleship, and 2 IPC’s for each submarine and each fighter or tac that was on a carrier.

So basically 1 IPC for each die that is rolled now.  The average dice damage is 1 IPC per die rolled, but could be as high as 3 per die, which is TRIPLE, which is excessive IMO.

[gamerman01]

If I want more dice rolled in my game, I’ll play with tech, tyvm  :-D

[Witt]

NO ckange from 1st Edition then. That was fine by me too.
Bombers and Subs are too cheap and powerful.

[axis-dominion]

i totally feel your pain…this is like back earlier this year when i felt the aa/interceptor dice were totally picking on me…it was seriously bad, my opponents were bombing the crap out of me at every turn and then sure enough, i’d go in for my own sbr revenge and come out of it with like 3 fewer bombers…that terrible phase eventually passed away (may it rest in hell), and i’m back to having happy luck with aa guns and interceptors  :-)

i too feel my convoy luck is generally not as good as my opponents. but nonetheless, on this one i do like the rules as they are

@Gamerman01:

? It’s not LL, it’s just going back to Alpha2 method for convoy damage, which was the standard for G40 for quite some time.  There are enough dice rolling in this game without adding huge fluctuations for convoy rolls.

It’s an annoyance that reduces my enjoyment of the game, so I’m going to remove it.

[gamerman01]

Yeah, that’s what I’m talking about, and I remember your woes!

With convoy rules, I at least have precedent for different rules (no dice) from the makers that I can fall back on  :mrgreen:

[majikforce]

Is it normal for Triple A to do this:  Lost Moscow, Russia took it back on their turn I made 38IPC.  Obviously I edited it to 0.  Just making sure I am not missing anything.  Thanks.

[gamerman01]

You would collect income on the same turn that Russia took Moscow back, in the collect income phase.  Is Russia’s income 38? 
Or is it raiding an Axis power’s treasury?

[majikforce]

Germany took Russia and then on Russia’s turn they took Moscow back. And triple A gave me 38 IPC’s.  I thought you had to own your capital at the beginning of your turn in order to make/collect income?

[boldfresh]

@majikforce:

Germany took Russia and then on Russia’s turn they took Moscow back. And triple A gave me 38 IPC’s.  I thought you had to own your capital at the beginning of your turn in order to make/collect income?

No you must own your capital at the start of your turn in order to produce units at factories you owned at the start of your turn.  Income is based on what you own at the end of your turn regardless of what you owned at the start of the turn.

[majikforce]

Thanks. Dusted off the old rule books and realized I’ve been playing that wrong for quite a while.  I will never master this game.  A big DOH on me! :-D

[gamerman01]

Will be a lot more problematic for your Allies to liberate France now  :wink:

[rgp44]

has the bid placement rule changed or am I confusing with a different version?  seems like you used to be able to place ground units in any territory you owned (whether occupied or not) only sea units were required to be placed with previously existing units.

[Soulblighter]

@rgp44:

has the bid placement rule changed or am I confusing with a different version?  seems like you used to be able to place ground units in any territory you owned (whether occupied or not) only sea units were required to be placed with previously existing units.

It has changed, but if you ask your opponent if you could have a french bomber in Madagscar, then I don’t see why you shouldn’t be able to get it. This is just an example. By default you can’t get any units anymore in say New Guinea, but if your opponent allows it, then it is allowed. The rules are just there for clarity.

[Soulblighter]

@Soulblighter:

@rgp44:

has the bid placement rule changed or am I confusing with a different version?  seems like you used to be able to place ground units in any territory you owned (whether occupied or not) only sea units were required to be placed with previously existing units.

It has changed, but if you ask your opponent if you could have a french bomber in Madagscar, then I don’t see why you shouldn’t be able to get it. This is just an example. By default you can’t get any units anymore in say New Guinea, but if your opponent allows it, then it is allowed. The rules are just there for clarity.

Right Gamer?

[gamerman01]

Yes, the default league rule changed from last year, but as long as your opponent agrees you can place you infantry in New Guinea or things like that.  If you don’t agree, the league rules are there to help you agree.

[Adam514]

Rules question:

1. Can unprotected transports stay in a sea zone with an enemy sub during the combat phase of the nation that owns the transports?

2. Would the presence of ships in the sea zone with the enemy sub allied to the transports change the answer to question 1?

Link to game if unclear: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35602.240

[axis-dominion]

@Adam514:

Rules question:

1. Can unprotected transports stay in a sea zone with an enemy sub during the combat phase of the nation that owns the transports?

2. Would the presence of ships in the sea zone with the enemy sub allied to the transports change the answer to question 1?

Link to game if unclear: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35602.240

subs do not make a sea zone hostile, which therefore means the zone is still friendly

From the Europe rulebook, pg. 8:

sea Zones
Sea zones are either friendly or hostile. Friendly sea zones contain no surface warships (this doesn’t include submarines and transports) belonging to a power with which you are at war. Hostile sea zones contain surface warships belonging to a power with which you are at war. (The presence of a surface warship
belonging to an enemy power with which you are not yet at war doesn’t make a sea
zone hostile.)
Note: The Caspian Sea (surrounded by Caucasus, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Eastern Persia, Persia, and Northwest Persia) is considered to be a sea zone, even though it does not have a number.

[axis-dominion]

more on pg. 14:

If you are sharing a sea zone with surface warships (not submarines and/or transports) belonging to a power with which you are at war, this situation requires you to do one of the following:
• Remain in the sea zone and conduct combat,
• Leave the sea zone, load units if desired, and conduct
combat elsewhere,
• Leave the sea zone, load units, and return to the same
sea zone to conduct combat (you can’t load units while
in a hostile sea zone), or
• Leave the sea zone and conduct no combat.
Once these sea units have moved and/or participated in combat, they can’t move or participate in the Noncombat Move phase of the turn.

[Adam514]

@axis-dominion:

@Adam514:

Rules question:

1. Can unprotected transports stay in a sea zone with an enemy sub during the combat phase of the nation that owns the transports?

2. Would the presence of ships in the sea zone with the enemy sub allied to the transports change the answer to question 1?

Link to game if unclear: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35602.240

subs do not make a sea zone hostile, which therefore means the zone is still friendly

From the Europe rulebook, pg. 8:

sea Zones
Sea zones are either friendly or hostile. Friendly sea zones contain no surface warships (this doesn�t include submarines and transports) belonging to a power with which you are at war. Hostile sea zones contain surface warships belonging to a power with which you are at war. (The presence of a surface warship
belonging to an enemy power with which you are not yet at war doesn�t make a sea
zone hostile.)
Note: The Caspian Sea (surrounded by Caucasus, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Eastern Persia, Persia, and Northwest Persia) is considered to be a sea zone, even though it does not have a number.

I know about subs not making a sea zone hostile, but following the same logic why would transports without a warship escort be unable to unload troops in a sea zone with an enemy sub present?

[axis-dominion]

there is one exception to all this, which is stated on pg. 16:

A transport that is part of an amphibious assault must end its movement in a friendly sea zone (or one that could become friendly as result of sea combat) from which it can conduct the assault. However, a transport
is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy submarines unless at least 1 warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.