if an sea zone with a naval base is hostile with enemy ships in it -- can i still build ships on that naval base?

@Krieghund

Good to know.

@arreghas I already have the required ‘Cargo Ships’ in 8 colours so I don’t need to look at another version.

Thanks for answering, Kreighund! These rules are a big departure from the other A&A games.

@oztea:

At this point in history fighters weren’t really ready to do any real damage to boats yet. Their speeds were very low and cross winds were very hazardous. Also planes of the time couldn’t carry very much in the way of firepower, so hurting a ship was outside their scope.

Yes, all good points.

There is no such thing as a contested sea zone.

Personally, I don’t think this should even occur. One round of sea combat only; if the defender survives the attacker must retreat (and can still do so even after a victory).

I can understand the logic behind a land force not being allowed to retreat after a victory - they have to consolidate their hold over the conquered tt.

But why would ships remain behind in an empty sea zone, especially if they can retreat back into a friendly port for repairs and/or reinforcements from newly launched ships? Unless they wish to launch amphibious assault or enact USW why should they be obliged to remain behind and quite possibly become sitting ducks for enemy fleets? A case of being punished for success?

The anomaly occurs when a player places new ships into a sea zone occupied by enemy fleet. Should a battle immediately occur? Or should the new ships only be “launched” in his next movement/combat cycle?

I don’t agree with Shakespeare’s point but I definitely agree that these games are leaving a lot to be desired. Not just from a rules perspective but from a piece perspective. Battle board is tiny. No money and lack of German infantry and chips for both sides. I have played with the new tournament rules however and do love them. If you have the game Shakespeare give them a shot I really like them. I think you will too.

@Jocher:

@Frontovik:

@Jocher:

Don’t consider an invasion of the British Isles…not going to work.��  Too many territories in the home island that the Brits can keep building upon in no time.��  Plus you have mines to face.��  The strategy doesn’t work.��  My advice, having played Germany a bunch now, is to destroy the Russian battleship and use YOUR waters as opposed to Britain’s waters.��  You can’t keep ferrying over troops to the western front with transports.��  you’ll keep facing mine dice.��  Better off using your navy (protected by 2 TT’s of mines) to ferry troops to the Russian front to make the Russies go down easier.�� 
Also, destroying the British home fleet isn’t such a bad thing.��  You’re right, it sort of leverages the Brits to building up India, becoming a pain for the Ottomans.��  However, as I discussed in my post at the top of the forums, the Ottomans are more than a match for a 100% British blitz in the middle east.��  Just keep retreating slowly, all the while piling up your forces.��  Better to have one huge clash 7 rounds in to the game, rather than have 7 smaller skirmishes that the Ottomans can’t keep up with.��  Fight in Constantinople…you will have accomplished taking the Brits out of the game almost completely, as they’re spending too much time chasing the Ottomans and not enough time where it matters…Europe and the Eastern front.

sounds like hitler luring the russians to berlin before beating them back to moscow and so winning world war 2…

not gonna happen; you can have your clash even later; but by round 9-10 constantinopel is in allied hands (unless the brits force that army up to sebastopol, which can be done if russia retreats from moscow to prevent RR)

Luring the Russians to Berlin?  This is a game bud.  Not real life.  So yes, the Germans could do what you are suggesting above and be successful sometimes and not successful other times, because we are playing a game.  Don’t confuse the two.  It’s silly that you are comparing a strategy in Axis and Allies to real history.

And yes, it is going to happen…I’ve already done it.  I might try another 10x only to fail 9x (or succeed), but the fact remains it is a viable strategy.  The money the Ottomans earn for their territories does not warrant a ‘stand your ground’…all that means is losing a lot of smaller skirmishes and having the territory taken from you anyhow.  I am not suggesting an immediate retreat.  I am suggesting that 4-5 turns in, when the Brits amass a large enough force to start taking Ottoman territory, that be the point where I suggest the Ottomans pull back some.  A Brit strategy to go all out in India means a good chance at conquering the Ottomans.  My suggestion is to pull back if the attacks are overwhelming and make your stand with a very large piled up Ottoman army in a territory closer to Constantinople.  Hopefully by then, Germany and Austria would have expanded because they haven’t had to fight the brits in Europe…only the weakened Russia ns and and the mighty French.  Austrians could, of course help the Ottomans if possible with reinforcements.

ok, now i understand; thanks. i use same strategy. but i’d add a tank to the force, for the small skirmishes that can’t be counterattacked. i think it saves a lot in a longer game. but face it, the ottomans will be overwhelmed and then the brits will start coming in the balkans.

and fun fact; india is as far away from vienna as berlin is from paris :p

Eight years later your post I have the game box here on my laps.
It says WWI 1914 and A&A game. So they didn’t really call it Axis and Allies. The game is super cool and since I am a great fan of the The Great War I have to say that I enjoy it even more than the other ( so far I have playes only anniversary). Kind regards. Meerko