News flash: AXIS & ALLIES ANNIVERSARY EDITION due out oct 23 08

@TheAandAClassicDude:

If so, what kinds of videos?

I’m sort of new here and I don’t know what kind of videos you normally do. I assume that they’re A&A related, but that’s all I know. So, um, what kind of videos would you be willing to do?

-Midnight_Reaper

Playing again this weekend.  I’ll take some pictures of the board setup.  I have downloaded and printed a 39"x119" double map from Imperious Leaders map selection.  It’s frickin’ huge.

Brian

Or you can just download the rulebook from the WOTC site, grab extra units (from other or older games), paint them to match, print a map out created by Imperious Leader and you should be on your way.

This is what I did any way.  Although I went as far as to recreate the Combat board, IPC chart and National Objective/Setup Charts.

Long live tech!

Bought mine a month ago for 82 bux off of amazon, guess i got lucky

@Cmdr:

If you are lucky and Japan is not primed to take India round 2, an Indian IC can be a godsend.

If Germany did not hit Egypt, than an Egyptian IC is even better! (Italy has no chance, not with 4 Infantry, Artillery, Armor, Fighter, Bomber in Egypt at the end of England 1.)

I like one in Philippines as well, FIC isn’t half bad either.

France works well for the Allies too.

If your building in France, Phil, Man, or FIC doesn’t that mean the game is well in progress and your at stages you can’t really plan for at the begining of a game?  And if the UK happened to take France it is so darn close to it I would hesitate to build an IC there (unless making massive amounts of cash).

A Brazil factory seems pointless/ a liabilaty, A Norway factory for the UK seems redundant (unless they are making massive amts of cash) but may be OK for the US player.  Canada seems silly.

I have never been in a position to be able to consider an early IC build in Egy or India.  If one insists on an early factory build I would say SAF is easily the most defendable option, but the better option if it can be done would be a T2 Aussie buy

@Krieghund:

@P@nther:

@Krieghund:

Since Jet Fighters increases fighters’ attack values to equal their defense values in normal combat, I’d say it would do the same in SBRs, allowing attacking fighters to roll on a 2. However, Larry will need to confirm that.

But this is still not confirmed by Larry as I think. Or is it?

Yes, it’s just been confirmed.  It will be in the next version of the FAQ (soon, I hope).

Great, thank you :-)

No, it can’t.  Just passing through the Philippines sea zone counts as two movements (one in, one out), since the fighter doesn’t actually enter the island territory.  However, attacking the Philippines territory would cost two extra movements: one to enter the Philippines from the sea zone and another to exit the Philippines back into the sea zone.

Your example would look like this:

1. Japan to sea zone 62.
2. Sea zone 62 to sea zone 60.
3. Sea zone 60 to sea zone 50.
4. Sea zone 50 to Philippine Islands.
5. Philippine Islands to sea zone 50.
6. Sea zone 50 to sea zone 49 (carrier).

As you can see, a standard fighter would be out of movement at the Philippines, with nowhere to land, making this an illegal move.

However, if the same fighter took off from a carrier in the Japan sea zone, it could attack the Philippines and land on a carrier (perhaps the same one) in the Philippines sea zone:

Sea zone 62 (carrier) to sea zone 60.
Sea zone 60 to sea zone 50.
Sea zone 50 to Philippine Islands.
Philippine Islands to sea zone 50 (carrier).

Each time a plane crosses a boundary between spaces (whether between land or sea or both), it uses one movement point.