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)
-
Question, Can planes fly over the Sahara desert? I didnt not if it was just impassable to land units or land and air units.
-
No, and can’t fly over Pripet marshes either
-
why is that? what prevents a plane from flying over marshes or a desert? The Himalayas make sense but not desert and marshes.
-
The rules prevent it
-
3 German air units are attacking 2 American cruisers and 3 submarines, even though the subs can’t hit air units or be used as casualties, the subs don’t have to submerge because the air units can’t hit them even if the subs were surfaced… right?
-
@Young:
3 German air units are attacking 2 American cruisers and 3 submarines, even though the subs can’t hit air units or be used as casualties, the subs don’t have to submerge because the air units can’t hit them even if the subs were surfaced… right?
Right, but it shouldn’t make any difference either way
-
I have a question.
On page 16 of the Europe 1940, 2ed edition rulebook, the section on Scramble starts with this sentence:
“Scrambling is a special movement that the defender can make at the end of this phase.” (emphasis added)Now here is the situation. The neutrals are still neutral. Italy and Germany have airbases with fighters in Gibraltar and Morocco, but there are no axis ships in z91. ANZAC declares war on the neutrals and attacks Portugal and Rio de Oro. Since they are not attacking any axis power, only neutral territories, would I be correct in my interpretation of the above sentence from the rulebook, which is that the axis planes cannot scramble because the axis are not the defenders in this situation? The neutrals are the defenders; not the axis and so they cannot scramble.
-
You are correct. Portugal and Rio de Oro are strict neutrals, not part of the Axis alliance. You can’t scramble planes to defend a territory that is not part of your alliance. So just as you said, the Axis are not defenders - their alliance is not under attack.
Interesting question!
-
You are correct. Portugal and Rio de Oro are strict neutrals, not part of the Axis alliance. You can’t scramble planes to defend a territory that is not part of your alliance. So just as you said, the Axis are not defenders - their alliance is not under attack.
Interesting question!
Awesome! Thank you Gamerman :-D
-
You bet, any time
Just realized there is a second part to your question - it just hasn’t come up for you perhaps
What if a strict neutral was previously attacked, and Portugal and Rio de Oro are pro-Axis?
You also can’t scramble to defend neutrals that are pro-your side, because they are neutral, they are not part of your alliance.
However, if the Allies attack Portugal and fail to conquer it, then Portugal is part of your alliance.
So let’s say USA attacks Portugal and fails to capture the territory. Then the UK attacks Portugal. NOW you can scramble, because Portugal is part of the Axis Alliance, due to the USA invasion.
That is the situation in which you could actually scramble to defend a territory that was originally neutral but none of your powers has actually taken control of the territory.
-
Perfect. That makes sense. Many thanks!
-
Hmm, so if the Germans try to land in Dutch Guiana, and the UK has fighters and an airbase on British Guyana, can they scramble into the seazone to defend the Dutch, since the Netherlands acts just like an originally true neutral that was “unsuccessfully attacked” in their colonies?
-
Dutch are not neutral - they are part of the Allies. Because of that, the British air on British Guyana with an airbase absolutely can always scramble to defend Dutch Guiana.
-
You can’t land planes in friendly neutrals before or while you activate them, right?
-
Once a neutral has been attacked by the other side it is friendly to you, and you are able to land planes there (or move in AAA guns) without activating it.
If Germany attacks Yugoslavia G1 and doesn’t take, the British can land planes in Yugoslavia on UK1
-
By the way, triplea incorrectly offers the option to scramble when a strict neutral is attacked that shares the same sea zone. Just choose no scramble.
-
You can’t land planes in friendly neutrals before or while you active them, right?
Correct. However, once the friendly neutral is attacked by an enemy power, it is no longer neutral, so that restriction no longer applies.
-
Ah, now I see I misread what he asked.
I saw “you can’t land planes in friendly neutrals until you activate them, right?”
Which would be wrong, because once a friendly neutral is attacked and is not neutral any more, you can land planes there without activating.
Edited my answer to delete “Wrong”
-
Going back to this question
I have a question.
On page 16 of the Europe 1940, 2ed edition rulebook, the section on Scramble starts with this sentence:
"Scrambling is a special movement that the defender can make at the end of this phase." (emphasis added)Now here is the situation. The neutrals are still neutral. Italy and Germany have airbases with fighters in Gibraltar and Morocco, but there are no axis ships in z91.  ANZAC declares war on the neutrals and attacks Portugal and Rio de Oro. Since they are not attacking any axis power, only neutral territories, would I be correct in my interpretation of the above sentence from the rulebook, which is that the axis planes cannot scramble because the axis are not the defenders in this situation? The neutrals are the defenders; not the axis and so they cannot scramble.Â
This is an excellent question…Â And I am inclined to agree with both of you, however:
Europe page 16 leaves some challenging statements
“…can be scramble to defend against attacks in the sea zones adjacent to those territories”
- doesn’t specify who is being attacked.
“…they can also be scramble to resist amphibious assaults from adjacent sea zones”
- with no reference to who is being amphibiously assaulted.
I would see the argument that because the “sea zone” is essentially being attacked in the combat phase by the allies, (because the allies have combat moved into it), that the defender can scramble.
And I would use this statement to allow my scramble
“They may defend against ships even if friendly ships are not present”
“Air units belong to powers friendly to the attacked power may be scrambled by their owner if the owning power is at war with the attacking power”
and last, Europe page 12
“War must be declared on your turn at the beginning of the combat move phase, before any combat movements are made.”
Invading Portugal is an act of war, and you must declare, and as soon as you declare war, Portugal is axis friendly.
Krieg can you confirm?
-
Krieg can you confirm?
I can see how Gargantua may be right, but I disagree. As I understand Gamerman’s explanation, the only ones who could scramble would be Portugal if they had an airbase and fighters, or Rio de Oro if they had an airbase and fighters, but they don’t have airbases or fighters so no scramble. They may become “axis friendly” when ANZAC attacks them, but they are still neutral and not part of the axis. So its not the axis’s fight and they can’t scramble.
But we would be very grateful for confirmation either way.
Suggested Topics
