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 Gamer.
Yes I meant 125. It makes sense that Russia should be able to DOW after being attacked.
Thanks
-
If you fail a tech research, you conserve all your tech tokens as AA 50th Anniversary?
-
No, that was changed. There are no tokens. That was AA50 and AA50 only.
Plus, you still can’t get more than 1 at a time (In classic you could get all 6 at once for 30 IPC’s if you rolled 6 6’s).
And some of them are so weak!
You may want to houserule it and play with tokens, or reduce the cost, or something. -
Can chinese units move to Burma or Kwangtung if British isn’t at war with Japan?
-
Yes, Chinese can move into Burma or Kwangtung at any time. (Although in all practicality, there will never be any Chinese units in Hong Kong before UK is at war with Japan :-))
There is a rule against UK/ANZ entering China when not at war with Japan, but no rule against China going to Burma or Hong Kong, and no stipulation that UK/ANZ must be at war with Japan first.
Neutral rules don’t apply because China is not neutral, and neither is UK/ANZ (at war in Europe, and can declare war on Japan on round 1 if they want).
-
Rules question regarding this game. I am pretty sure it can be done, but wish to make certain as a lot as it stake here.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34792.75
Can I move my Italian destroyer in Z92 to Z108, thus ignoring the American submarine, during NCM.
-
The american destroyer is in Z91 btw.
-
-
A destroyer will stop a subs movement , but a sub doesn’t stop a destroyers movement.
-
I didn’t follow the link, but went by your description.
A destroyer (indeed, any boat even a transport) can always noncom to a seazone containing only subs/transports.
BTW a sub can noncom into a zone containing a destroyer, it just can’t go beyond the destroyer zone into another zone.
-
A transport cannot however NCM to a hostile sea zone, correct?
-
@IKE:
A transport cannot however NCM to a hostile sea zone, correct?
Right, a hostile sea zone being a sea zone containing a surface warship of a power with which you are at war.
-
On a strategic bombing raid, can I send tactical bombers along when they have no target? The reason for doing that would be that if they get shot down, I’d rather lose a tactical bomber than a strategic bomber.
For example: can I send a tactical bomber along with my strategic bombers against a territory that has a factory, but no air base or harbor? Or, alternatively, can I do that when the territory does have an air base or a harbor that has already been damaged to the maximum? In the latter case it could be argued that I would “normally” have had a target, but it just happens to be in too bad a shape to be bombed, which seems a bit odd. I mean, I could drop my bombs on the ruins of that harbor or air field, couldn’t I?
-
KaLeun, you’re such a trouble maker :wink:
Great question, I had the same one a while back.
First of all, only fighters can escort, per the rulebook.
Second, after any air battle with defending interceptors, you will assign your strats and tacs to targets.
Now you’re saying there is no target for the tactical. That is, there are no naval or air bases. Therefore, they are not shielding the strategic bombers from AA fire, because the industrial complex AA will be firing at attackers, and the only attackers will be strategic bombers. If you’re sending tacticals at a bombed out base, then that’s doubly ineffective, because the tactical would be taking AA fire for no reason, and would not be shielding the strats.
So I think the part you’re overlooking is that AA fire occurs AFTER dividing the strats/tacs into groups and going after the different facilities. You can’t send tacs at industrial complexes, so the tactic you are describing is not a viable option, no.
Wait, now I get your question. You want the tacs to shield your strats in the air war, when the tacs have no target, or a bombed out base is the only “target”.
Not 100% sure on that answer because I didn’t write it down after getting it from Krieghund. Must have thought I’d remember, or something.
If you want 100% answer on that, you’ll need Krieghund or someone who remembers or can quote his answer. It’s a good question because the rulebook doesn’t address it, and seems to allow for this tactic. -
i would think you can send tacs if there are bases, even if they are bombed out. however, if the tacs survive the air battle they would have to take aa fire as well i should think.
so the rules explicitly state that only fighters can function as escorts?
-
Yes only fighters are escorts and that is explicit. Do you have a rule book, Bold?
Yes, the tacs would definitely have to take AA fire from the base, but it could still be a smart move if it’s allowed. Because you would be shielding the strats from interceptors and raising your chance of IC damage.
I am sure that you can’t send tacs if there is no base to bomb, because then they would be functioning like fighter escorts and they can’t. But I’m not sure about whether they can be sent to bomb a base that’s already at 6 damage.
-
KaLeun, you’re such a trouble maker :wink:
Thanks! :-D
The reason I’m asking, is that I noticed that TripleA won’t allow it - if I move in the planes in that situation, it will treat it as an attack and not give me the option to bomb. But in different situations, where bombing can be done with strats and tacs, TripleA will allow me to pick which of them will get shot down by the AA, if any.
-
Triple A is wrong about the AA. It’s a known bug. You need to scour the list in Triple A under
Help -> Game notes(Most all of these were added as a result of my compilation of observations and questions from players and my own experiences)
There are many known bugs. Do not rely on Triple A or even use what it allows or disallows, as an indication. Thou must know the rulebook thyself. (Or ask someone who does)
-
It’s not really a bug, there is a game option “Choose AA casualties” that you can toggle on to make it how Herr KaLeun described. It’s generally the option used for Low Luck games, although technically only the units attacking the same facility should be grouped. (i.e. A tac bombs an airbase while 2 strats bomb a Major IC: the tac should roll AA@1 and the 2 strats would roll an AA@2, instead of 1 AA@3)
-
Well, that’s interesting information, but this is listed in the Triple A game notes:
(NA) During an SBR, AA fire and casualty selection should be done on a per-facility-being-attacked basis
NA stands for None Available - There is no fix available for this yet.
Regardless, the point stands. Don’t count on Triple A to follow the rule book.
Suggested Topics
