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)
-
@VZSTAL:
So I’ve been out of the A&A loop for about a year but recently decided to dust off old dice boot and get some friends into the game only to discover that there is this new 1940 2nd edition. Since its been released for a decent amount of time I was hoping I could get some advice about how much of an improvement this is and if there is a way to pick up only the new pieces as opposed to buying two more games.
THANKS!
Historicalboardgaming sells individual A&A pieces as well as custom pieces. You should check them out.
-
@VZSTAL:
So I’ve been out of the A&A loop for about a year but recently decided to dust off old dice boot and get some friends into the game only to discover that there is this new 1940 2nd edition. Since its been released for a decent amount of time I was hoping I could get some advice about how much of an improvement this is and if there is a way to pick up only the new pieces as opposed to buying two more games.
THANKS!
You have the original P40 and E40 like I do? I don’t think there are any new pieces - the main change is a new rulebook and starting setup…
The rules and setup are significantly improved from the “1st edition”.
-
I don’t think there are any new pieces
No new pieces?! ANZAC and Italy all have unique pieces now.
As a matter of fact, every nation has unique pieces for everything, even AA guns!
(Except the British transport and every French piece except their infantry… and China still uses US planes and artillery…)If you mean no new pieces as in no new unit types, then well, the Anti-Aircraft Artillery units are new even though they’re just the successor to the AA guns.
-
Right
I’ve never even seen 2nd edition and I read about the AAA guns and different infantry many months ago and had forgot. Guess I shouldn’t have posted.So follow the link the guy gave you -
I guess those minor changes didn’t mean much to me. -
I forget the answer to this one….
Is it impossible for ground units to unload from an ally’s transport to invade against scrambled aircraft without a surface ship or aircraft in the seazone?
Would the scrambled aircraft be attacking the transports? Because they don’t belong to the power that’s moving/attacking… which makes me think that it’s impossible to scramble because there’s nothing to scramble against… and that confusion is why I’m asking the question. I’ll write it in my rulebook this time!
-
From the Europe FAQ:
Q. Say the United Kingdom launches an amphibious assault from a US transport without any supporting UK sea or air units in the sea zone, and then the defender scrambles. What happens?
A. In effect, nothing happens. The US transport doesn’t participate in the sea battle because it’s not the US’s turn. Since there are no attacking sea or air units, there is no sea battle. However, the sea zone can’t be cleared of defending combat units, so the amphibious assault can’t proceed. -
Ah, so it is impossible, as long as the defender does scramble to that zone
(Would be possible to get him to scramble his fighters to a different zone so the assault could proceed) So it could conceivably be worth trying, if you’re going to give the defender something else to scramble/intercept at the same time…
-
Ooh, I wasn’t aware of that FAQ…. Printing now! Thanks for the link
-
Interesting that it’s called a Europe FAQ and has a Mongolia question on it… :wink:
I guess Europe was the 2nd one to come out and you need it to have global, which is the only time Japan could invade Russia and Mongolia at the same time
-
Interesting that it’s called a Europe FAQ and has a Mongolia question on it… Â :wink:
Yes, in the Global Game Rules section.
-
Ah, I missed that at a glance :-P
-
May I take a pro allies territory with an aa gun as the allies?
-
No Cow.
Has to be a ground unit with an attack value, so it is the only one which cannot.
Explains it in the section at the back: Land Units. -
Wittman is right, again.
I hereby nominate Wittman to be a rules deputy. :-)
-
cow knows surprisingly little about the game for how great he claims to
be… :roll: -
-
Triple A allows two tacs on a carrier…is this legal? I thought you could have two fighters or one fighter and one tac…was this rule changed in 2e?
-
@captain:
Triple A allows two tacs on a carrier…is this legal? I thought you could have two fighters or one fighter and one tac…was this rule changed in 2e?
Rule changed apparently cuz u can have 2 tacs on an acc.
-
@captain:
Triple A allows two tacs on a carrier…is this legal? I thought you could have two fighters or one fighter and one tac…was this rule changed in 2e?
No, you could always have 2 tacs on a carrier from the beginning
-
I have a question about factory upgrades.
In a game Im currently playing my opponent took Moscow and reduced the major to a minor. Russia took Moscow back and was able to grab some of the Eastern Europe territories…so they collected 54 pu’s.
Can I pay for the upgrade and immediately place ten units in Moscow…or do I have to wait a turn? It will be another few turns before Germany threatens Moscow again and I want to get as many units placed as I can.
Suggested Topics
