Axis and Allies 1914 FAQ/Question and Answer Thread

@Eqqman

Oh shoot, sorry, you’re right, I read it wrong.

@JonathanMeyer:

a)Yes, units hit do get to fire back. b) The rule book is not clear on this point.  However, I would say that yes you can still bombard.  While I can see an argument going the other way based on a certain interpretation of unclear rules, logically its likely that a battleship would not wait to bombard the shore until after the landing troops had been fired upon.

You can still bombard.  Battleship bombardment is dependent upon the number of units that offloaded from transports, not how many of them actually made it ashore.

In the designer’s Tournament rules (which can be found here), any power can collapse, and Russia has no special rules (the Russian Revolution rules are not used).

@Jocher:

1 - Tanks.  Can someone explain tanks to us in detail?  They attack at 2, defend at 1?  They soak up hits?  How?  We didn’t understand tanks at all and haven’t used them yet due to this fact.  Please help if you can.

Tanks attack at 2 (3 when supported by artillery) and defend at 1.  When attacking (not defending), each tank cancels one hit scored by the defender.  However, tanks may not cancel hits scored by pre-emptive artillery strikes while performing an amphibious assault.

@Jocher:

2 - Army Movement.  Example -  I am playing as Germany, and I have let’s say 30Inf/20Art and I move them in to hostile French Territory which houses 30Inf/20Art themselves.  We duke it out for that round (Germany attacks, France defends) and the territory becomes contested.  After the initial attack, both Germany and France go down to, let’s say, 20Inf/10Art each.  Now it’s France’s turn.  #1 - Does France have the choice to NOT defend, and instead retreat all their armies and give the territory to Germany?

France has the option to not attack.  A power is never the defender on its own turn.

It may reinforce the territory with more units, or withdraw some or all of its units.  Any units in the territory may then attack, or they may do nothing.

@Jocher:

Now let’s say France decides to fight.  After France defends, the armies are both split evenly at 10Inf/5Art.  Territory is still contested.  Next turn is Germany’s.  #2 - As Germany, can I move my 10Inf/5Art closer to Paris?  Or must my army stay in the territory until no more hostile units are in it?

When units move out of a contested territory, they must move into a territory that either was controlled by their power or contained units beloning to their power at the beginning of the turn.  Germany may move its units closer to Paris only if those conditions are met.

@Jocher:

4 - If I am Germany and just took Rome, the next round am I allowed to muster units in Rome, or do the Allies/CP ONLY muster units in their capital and NOT in captured capitals?

You may only mobilize land and air units in your own capital (or in India if you’re the British Empire).  You may only mobilize sea units in sea zones that have a naval base located in a territory that you originally controlled (has only your power’s emblem) and was not under enemy control at the beginning of your turn.

Kreighund never explained why this was introduced, when it appears to benefit the CPs only in limited movement through such tts. They would surely be better off being able to withdraw from them.

@KimRYoung:

@rjpeters70:

Dude, no offense was meant whatsoever.�  I was not knocking you or Koreans at all (I’ve even been to the ROK, and loved it).�  It’s just the first thing that jumps in my head these days, given that we have a crazy dictator actively threatening nuclear war named Kim.

I’m not offended at all RJ, just letting everyone know who I am. It was also bad in the late 60’s when the name Kim became a common girls name (short for Kimberly), then if they didn’t know, they thought I was a girl. In H.S. I got put in an all girls health education class, which I thought was great! I still get mail to Ms. Kim Young  :lol:

Kim (white, non-Korean male  8-)

For what it’s worth, I know a Korean named Robert E. Lee.

The point of the sentence I quoted is simply to differentiate “regional territories” from “colonies”.  Regional territories can trace a line through contiguous original territories back to the capital, while colonies are removed from the capital.  The only difference this really makes is that colonies of minor powers are handled a little differently than their capitals.  Since minor powers don’t have regional territories anyway, this sentence is more about “flavor” than anything else.

There are many reasons for the failure of the Spring Offensive the nutritional status of the German Army, the Deciphering of German radio traffic by Georges Painvin, 1 mio CP Soldiers still hanging out in the East, but the main reason were the Strategic errors of the German leadership.
Ludendorffs decision to reinforce troops who encountered the stubborn resistance led to an improper use of the powers. The findings of the subsequent World War showed that to maximize the shock effect precisely those troops should be increased, which had already achieved the greatest success. Generally, the reserve management during the offensive was problematic, since only the troops in the front line were reinforced and that no full new units were brought there. This led to rapid fatigue of the deployed forces. Furthermore, the fixation of the General Staff only on the military concept of the breakthrough. The offensive had been planned by the OHL consistently methodically, but only up to the supposedly decisive goal, the shock through the enemy lines. An orderly plan for the exploitation of the resulting gaps, something like an (don´t know whats it in english) “Umfassungsmanöver” was not hit. The shock of the attack had been identified as shock troops tactically decisive factor, however, to use this principle as a strategic moment, was not considered.

Hey Flash, will you also simulate the Christmas Peace of 1914 ? Maybe with a little football on the map ?  :wink: