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)
-
just read it quick but I’m not sure that last part is Right gammer. If allies broke neutrality then all neutrals but mongolia are already pro axis.
Yeah, I think you read it too quick. Read it again.
-
just read it quick but I’m not sure that last part is Right gammer. If allies broke neutrality then all neutrals but mongolia are already pro axis.
Yeah, I think you read it too quick. Read it again.
I think ive been reading cow’s ramblings too much its scrambling my brains.
-
Can you blitz a pro axis during non combat from and to a territory you control? Say west germ -> switzerland ->france?
-
@Cow:
Can you blitz a pro axis during non combat from and to a territory you control? Say west germ -> switzerland ->france?
NO. You also can’t move mech or armor through a friendly neutral that you just took in noncombat.
You can only blitz neutrals that are empty and are either true neutrals or unfriendly to you.
The rule book plainly says, under “friendly neutrals”
“They can be moved into (but not through) as a noncombat move by land units of a power that is at war”Do you have access to a rule book, Cow?
-
It is just cooler to ask these things on the FAQ. :)
Eventually every possible rule question about subs, neutrals, politics, etc will be asked. Then a simple search will end any argument or debate possible.
Oh yeah the whole share sea zone thing is still the same right?
-
Same as what? AA50?
-
@Cow:
It is just cooler to ask these things on the FAQ. :)
Eventually every possible rule question about subs, neutrals, politics, etc will be asked. Then a simple search will end any argument or debate possible.
Oh yeah the whole share sea zone thing is still the same right?
A classic unintelligible cow question.
-
Questions about strategic and tactical bombing…
1). During the combat move phase, before combat begins(i.e. rolling for fighter interceptors, fighters escorts, AA, etc…), do the tactical bombers and strategic bombers bombing a territory(either IC’s, AB’s or NB’s) have to announce what they’re bombing? Meaning, the player announces this tactical bomber is bombing this airbase and these 3 SBR’s are strategically bombing this IC? Or, does the player say, this tactical bomber and these 3 SBR’s are performing strategic and tactical bombing on this territory and then after fighter interceptors, fighter escorts are rolled for, if any, does the player announce which target they’re bombing?
2). Do tactical bombers get to roll a “1” during the combat phase, if the other player has fighter interceptors? Or, do only SBR’s roll “1’s” during this phase? Of course fighter interceptors and fighter escorts get to roll “1’s” during this phase as well.
-
You dont announce what bombers are bombing what until the air battle is over. Tacs do get to roll in the air battle.
-
Right
-
Question RE: scramble.
I think I know the answer is no, but…. one can only hope.
If US parks its fleet on ncm next to an enemy airbase and then the UK attacks the territory with an amphib and the defender scrambles, does the US fleet participate in the pre-amphib naval combat?
It would be sweet if it could, but I gather the use of the word “attacker” in the scramble rule means only ships actually attacking and not just sailing around.
-
Right. Only the units of the power taking the turn can be considered/used.
Note that if your units are on an allied transport and there are enemy surface ships or scrambled aircraft present, and you have none of your own naval or air units to bring to the zone in combat movement, you can not unload.
-
ag, what I expected.
-
Is the Yukon territory inaccessible? Meaning, you can’t put units there? I’m trying to move an American AA gun from Alberta to Yukon in TripleA and it’s not letting me. Does that also mean that a Japanese tank can’t blitz from Alaska to Alberta? Thanks!
-
yukon territory is impassable, or merged with british columbia, however you prefer to see it.
-
Is the Yukon territory inaccessible? Meaning, you can’t put units there? I’m trying to move an American AA gun from Alberta to Yukon in TripleA and it’s not letting me. Does that also mean that a Japanese tank can’t blitz from Alaska to Alberta? Thanks!
Yukon territory does not even exist in 2nd edition.
He just grayed it out in Triple A rather than redraw the map. -
Thanks Boldfresh and Gamerman!
-
Can the Soviets collect the SZ125/Archangel NO if they are at war with Italy, still neutral with Germany, but a German submarine is in SZ125?
-
Can the Soviets collect the SZ125/Archangel NO if they are at war with Italy, still neutral with Germany, but a German submarine is in SZ125?
That’s a good question.
First of all, the Soviets do not need to be at war with Germany to collect the NO, because the rule book says “when the Soviet Union is at war in Europe”
The NO rule says there must be no Axis warships in Z125, which would indicate the answer is the Soviets do not collect the NO.
However, normally you can ignore units of powers with which you are not at war.
So I don’t know. I do know that if there was no German sub, the Soviets would still collect, because only being at war with Italy is enough.
You’ll need Kreighund or someone who knows what Krieghund has said in the past.
-
Can the Soviets collect the SZ125/Archangel NO if they are at war with Italy, still neutral with Germany, but a German submarine is in SZ125?
That’s a good question.
First of all, the Soviets do not need to be at war with Germany to collect the NO, because the rule book says “when the Soviet Union is at war in Europe”
The NO rule says there must be no Axis warships in Z125, which would indicate the answer is the Soviets do not collect the NO.
However, normally you can ignore units of powers with which you are not at war.
So I don’t know. I do know that if there was no German sub, the Soviets would still collect, because only being at war with Italy is enough.
You’ll need Kreighund or someone who knows what Krieghund has said in the past.
No. Even though Germany and the USSR are not themselves at war, Germany can still interdict Allied aid to the Soviets.
Suggested Topics
