Question for Krieghund [or anyone else that knows for sure]

Awesome, thanks Krieghund… while you’re here, any chance we can get a brief explanation why this and the London NO for Germany were dropped in 2nd Edition?

Thanks again.

Great answer.  Thank you

It was helpful in a game that has somehow lasted to round 15

Our group has had this discussion many times. It seems unrealistic that a country would develop something that is not useful.  In one of our games Russia bought a non-disposable tech dice and actually rolled a 6 then rolled on the chart and got “War Bonds” which was cool for them but if you look at the list there are very few that Russia can benefit from.  Mostly depends if they are on the offensive.  If they are on the defensive then only “War Bonds” and “Increased Factory Production” seem to be worthwhile.  “Radar” would also be good but its on a separate chart with tech that would not benefit them.  Most would say that Russia should not even consider rolling on tech and I tend to agree unless they are on the offensive and have a massive economy.

And submarines / fighters on carriers can do 2 damage under the new Alpha 3 convoy rules.  (Under the old, Submarines could do up to 2 to each enemy nation bordering the convoy zone.)

@SSPanther:

Hey Krieghund (sp?) or anyone else out there, I need to questions answered for a game we are playing now.

1. If the US is not yet at war with Japan, and flies their fighter from the Philipinnes to Burma or Kwangtung, if the Japanese then attack the British in either of those territories, does it provoke the US and bring them into the war? Or can this non-combat move even be made by the US

1. The US, while neutral, cannot move units into or over territories that do not belong to them.  They cannot move a fighter into a UK territory, and thus this example can never happen.

@SSPanther:

2. Can Russia, when not yet at war, move ships into a seazone with UK ships, and can they move into a seazone with German ships?

3. Can Russia, when not at war, move into NW Persia?

Thank you!

2. Yes

3. No, not until at war on that side of the board (so war against German or Italy).

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23640.0
And some other one somewhere

The carrier fires back as long as it isn’t sunk.

@Krieghund:

During your Collect Income phase, check for any convoy sea zones that are adjacent to territories that you control and that also contain warships (not transports) belonging to powers with which you are at war.  For each such sea zone, first add up the total IPC value of the adjacent territories that you control, giving you the maximum number of IPCs that you can lose in that zone.  Then, add up the total number of enemy warships (submarines count as two) to get your potential losses in that zone.  Finally, subtract whichever of those two numbers is lower from the income you collect.  Repeat this process for each eligible sea zone.

Example:  Italy controls Southern Italy, Northern Italy, Yugoslavia, and Albania, and there are two UK submarines in sea zone 97.  The total IPCs controlled by Italy adjacent to sea zone 97 is 10.  The two subs can destroy 4 IPCs.  Since 4 is less than 10 (the damage done is less than the maximum that the sea zone can sustain), Italy subtracts 4 IPCs from the income it collects.

but say, greece has 2 adjacent convoy zones, can greece lose 4 IPC?
i thought no, but not sure. wouldn’t be very logical
and what if german has greece and yugolavia, and US puts subs in adriatic sea. do they do convoy damage to germans and italians at same time?