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)
-
Okay, so current theory is this is an illegal move, but neither Gamerman nor I are 100% sure on it:
Can you over fly a friendly neutral you are activating that round, during non-combat movement.
Example:
- England has an aircraft somewhere. In order to fly it to where she wants it to be, she has to fly over a friendly neutral. She happens to have an infantry unit available to activate the friendly neutral and does so. Is the air space considered a valid space to fly?
Rationales:
1) Literally the territory was not friendly or hostile at the start of the round.
2) You wouldn’t be able to blitz through the territory legally.
3) It is not a combat move, even hostile nations cannot stop you from flying over them in non-combat movement.
4) You cannot fly over neutrals in non-combat movement.
5) You may certainly fly over friendly territories during non-combat movement, and you are making it friendly by sending a liberation force to remove the oppressive regime currently there (I dunno, how do you justify Persians and Greeks surrendering to the British???)I’m not referring to true neutrals or hostile neutrals. Just friendly ones. I’m thinking NO, but then, I’ve only had 1 game back in 9 months, and I am not going to open the shrink wrap on my new global boxes and pull the rules especially as my trusted go to people don’t really know for sure one way or the other. :P
-
I have a question about AA guns. If a territory has AA guns from more than one country, are they all treated as the same AA defense? Or do you count each nation’s AA gun separately?
For example: In oztea’s 1942 setup, India is defended by 2 UK AA Guns and 1 ANZAC AA gun. Normally, it would be up to 9 AA shots OR the number of planes if all 3 AA guns were from the same country. If you have AA guns from different countries, does it still work the same?
Say Japan attacks India with 5 aircraft. Since the UK has 2 AA guns, they would get 5 AA shots at the Japanese planes. Would the 1 ANZAC AA gun also get an additional 3 AA shots at the Japanese planes? Or would the ANZAC AA gun not shoot at all unless the Japanese came with 7 or more planes?I know in Global 1940 this doesn’t really come up but in oztea’s 1942 setup, there is a lot of mixing of Allied forces right from the get-go.
-
@Cmdr:
Can you over fly a friendly neutral you are activating that round, during non-combat movement.
No.
I have a question about AA guns. If a territory has AA guns from more than one country, are they all treated as the same AA defense?
Yes. They are all defending together as a group.
-
However, if some of them are radar, they would be rolled separately. You could have some AA hitting on a 1 and some on a 2.
If you had 1 radar unit and 1 non-radar unit and 5 planes flying overhead, you could roll 3 dice for the radar hitting on a 2, and 2 dice for the AA hitting on a 1 -
Do you have to declare all rocket attacks before rolling any of them?
Or can you pick one, roll it, then pick the next and roll it, etc. -
Do you have to declare all rocket attacks before rolling any of them?
Or can you pick one, roll it, then pick the next and roll it, etc.Declare them all before rolling any of them.
-
Kamikazes
Was the activation requirement removed in 2nd Edition? (Allies must capture/recapture certain island territories)
Also, what’s the best way to find answers in these forums? There are so many topics and replies I don’t know where to look sometimes other than the obvious places like this thread. The search bar powered by google is hit or miss unless you nail the key words. I feel like a lot of people are asking the same questions over and over again. It’s like I’m trying to find Waldo in a crowd full of submarine and transport questions.
-
Kamikazes
Was the activation requirement removed in 2nd Edition? (Allies must capture/recapture certain island territories)
Yes.
Also, what’s the best way to find answers in these forums? There are so many topics and replies I don’t know where to look sometimes other than the obvious places like this thread. The search bar powered by google is hit or miss unless you nail the key words. I feel like a lot of people are asking the same questions over and over again. It’s like I’m trying to find Waldo in a crowd full of submarine and transport questions.
Have you tried using the search in the toolbar above the Google search? You must be logged in to see it.
-
Have you tried using the search in the toolbar above the Google search? You must be logged in to see it.
This one works very well. You can select only the G40 forums for your key word. I have had success the times I’ve used this button. (The one between “help” and “profile”)
You’re right, the “Google” search bar isn’t very effective for finding answers to rules questions.
-
Have you tried using the search in the toolbar above the Google search? You must be logged in to see it.
This one works very well. You can select only the G40 forums for your key word. I have had success the times I’ve used this button. (The one between “help” and “profile”)
You’re right, the “Google” search bar isn’t very effective for finding answers to rules questions.
That’s the problem. I have no “search” button. This what my toolbar looks like in both Firefox and Internet Explorer:
Home Help Profile My Messages Members Chat Logout
-
Hmmm. Perhaps it is only enabled after you reach a certain number of posts?
-
my tool bar is the same as mgonzo’s
the google search bar is not effective at finding information. -
Wow, I feel special now!
I always wondered why people said the search was no good…. must be because they don’t have it on the toolbar!
I can’t think of any reason for this… Wouldn’t everyone’s be the same?? Curious…
-
Wow, I feel special now!
I always wondered why people said the search was no good…. must be because they don’t have it on the toolbar!
I can’t think of any reason for this… Wouldn’t everyone’s be the same?? Curious…
I have a search button as well!!! wow, guess i’m special too. :lol:
-
There seems to be a pattern emerging here. Apparently only patrons (and other special people :wink:) have the search button enabled.
-
A very interesting hypothesis….
Can anyone confirm/deny?
-
I’ve got it, too.
-
no special search button here. I’ve always had to use that horrible google search option. but I’m not a patron. and apparently not special.
-
OK kcdzim, so what we need is for you to donate $50 to the site (or you can donate the bronze amount first and see if that works) and if you then get the search function, we will know for sure.
And yes, you should do it because you’re a rules deputy and that function would help you greatly. :-)
-
I have a question about where US ships can move before US enters war. From my understanding they can not enter a sea zone adjacent to a Japanese controlled sea zone. For instance does that mean they could not enter sea zone 6 but could enter one space next to it? Or does it mean they can’t move one space next to it as well while not at war?
Thanks,
Suggested Topics
