I love that question!
I don’t remember what was intended years ago.
But I checked the rulebook, and on page 27 of the Europe 2nd edition rulebook, it is clear that infrastructure pieces are called “units”.
Since league rules have not clearly stated that infrastructure units are NOT allowed, they are allowed.
I will clarify in the league rules.
Remember there must be another unit in that territory, which would of course include another facility, or any other unit.
Therefore you could place a naval base on Wake Island, for example. Because although there is no combat unit, there is an air base.
thanks
:)
Just everyone knows… you actually don’t see it often…
@gamerman01 thank you for the clarification. Although an IC in Egypt at the beginning of the game is killing Italy immediately 🤔
@martin I no i’ve tried a while back and was told i couldn’t.
@dawgoneit same here
… and consequently I also denied it to others
Consider it clarified permanently!
If UK puts IC in Egypt, they are not adding 2 subs desperately needed in round 1, and if UK builds units in Egypt in turn 1, those are IPC’s not put on London, potentially inviting Sealion.
In other words, a UK IC in Egypt as a bid makes it easier on Germany - watch out. And then, of course, if Italy does manage to take it, you just built one for Italy.
Well… and if the IC in Egypt means no sub in 98, then UK is weaker in the Med at game start. Trade-offs.
@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:
Consider it clarified permanently!
If UK puts IC in Egypt, they are not adding 2 subs desperately needed in round 1, and if UK builds units in Egypt in turn 1, those are IPC’s not put on London, potentially inviting Sealion.
In other words, a UK IC in Egypt as a bid makes it easier on Germany - watch out. And then, of course, if Italy does manage to take it, you just built one for Italy.
Well… and if the IC in Egypt means no sub in 98, then UK is weaker in the Med at game start. Trade-offs.
it depends on the offer… if it’s high (as in this case) there’s an IC and two submarines
Yep - remember that before giving up 24
@gamerman01 its a different game again.
Enjoy!! Sounds like the question should have been asked by someone some time ago! Thanks, Dawg! I had to do a little research to definitively interpret that league rule.
@gamerman01 :+1:
Especially for those who haven’t been with us long -
If you wish you could edit or delete a post that you made here, just ask me and I’ll do it for you if it looks appropriate.
It’s been years since I couldn’t, but I’m guessing you aren’t able to modify your posts in the “Play Online Axis & Allies” forum. Maybe goes back to the ABattlemap days, where you could easily cheat if you could modify your posts…
@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:
Obviously every year that goes by and we’re playing the same version year after year, the interest wanes.
And as Karl said, G40 games take a lot of time and commitment. Compared to earlier versions of global A&A, well, there is no comparison as most of you know.G40 was such a leap forward for A&A in so many ways, it’s no wonder at all there was huge interest for the first few years, and a great observation by Simon that Balanced Mod was a big improvement that breathed new life and stoked a lot of interest, but it loses its new car smell too, like anything.
Someone, design a new global version of A&A that raises our heart rate again!
I have played A&A&Zombies and it is a hoot, a perfect “beer and pretzels game” as players used to say. But most of us probably wouldn’t play it very many times.
FABULOUS entry level A&A game, and also VERY interesting for veterans.
France goes first! Boom!
I was wondering if we might incentivize players giving away high bids by rewarding them with more points?
My first instinct is to say absolutely not, but I thought about it a few seconds.
If we’re even going to talk about it, I would require a standard scale for the bids.
For example, you give a +50 bid to allies, you get +1 point. + 75 gives +2
So if you give a tier 2 opponent a +75 bid, you would get +7 for winning, +3 for losing.
But then… the player with the big bid would receive fewer points?
I don’t like bigger bids because it gets away from the regular setup more and more, and makes bid selection a bigger part of the game before G1 even starts.
So I promise nothing, but can’t resist discussing things.
Thoughts on handicaps? On modifying the point scale? If both players agree, most anything is allowed. But altering the point scale has to go by me… there would have to be a set scale for bid amounts as per above.
Only discussing, nothing promised. No change this big will be done without many league players supporting it.
@gamerman01 what if some of the bid was standardized AND didn’t effect the opening moves beyond what passes for common sense (sub in 111, 98, etc). The rest has to be put in Russia or China, interior territories.
@crockett36 what passes for common sense could be defined by the champions or runners up.
