Posts made by COJOH

@krieghund yes, that is what I meant

@krieghund sorry, maybe due to the language difference (English is my 3th language) that I didn’t understand it very well.
So… can I play it like in the rules from 1940 and 1942 ?

Sorry for my late reply, I was a few days out of my home. I’m a little confused from the different answers. I was hoping that the explanation would have been simply that the FAQ follows the future rules from1940 or 1942 where you may move a fighter to a sea zone next to an industrial complex where you will place an A/C you bought during the purchase units phase. According to Krieghund the answer is no, according to AndrewAA (OOB rules and LHTR) the answer is yes.

The operations manual page 22, states that newly built A/C can enter play with fighters aboard, whether those are built this turn or already in the territory containing the industrial complex.
The FAQ, page 7, “mobilize units”, first question states that existing fighters who are in the territory containing the industrial complex OR in the sea zone where the A/C is built can immediately be moved onto a newly built carrier.

So , is the FAQ the most accurate explanation ?

@krieghund Tks !

@krieghund ok, and is the interpretation about the rockets correct (move and shoot) ?

Hello there, after playing different versions of A&A (world at war, anniversary version, old Europe, 1940 Europe and Pacific, bulge and Guadalcanal), I returned now to the original classic version A&A. I played it before when I was a kid, many many years ago.
Now, I have some questions:

1. In the rule’s clarifications form Bradley, page 2, Par (5) about Rockets, it is mentioned that a rocket can move before combat. So that means, that you can move to one (friendly) territory and then fire a rocket to an enemy industrial complex at a distance up to 3 adjacent spaces away. I find this clarification very odd because this is even not mentioned in the revised version A&A.
2. It is not allowed to place fighters directly on a newly bought carrier, but this makes the “naked” carrier very vulnerable for the coming round. As soon as UK or GER have some bombers or fighters in the neighbourhood, it is almost impossible to start a new fleet in the Atlantic (UK and USA) or the Mediterranean see (GER). In my game it leads to empty sea spaces around Europe. Shouldn’t it be a better game allowing (new) fighters to land on newly bought carries like in many other A&A games ?
3. After combat with fighters on carriers that were destroyed, you may only land the fighter on an island of another carrier. So, you may land on the small islands and also on England, Japan, New Zealand, etc. , but not on the coast of e.g., Australia? I find this very weird because going from the sea around an island to the island is also one move of a territory, just like going to an adjacent coast. Maybe this is the reason why it has been changed in all the other versions of A&A… Also here, shouldn’t it be a better game to allow it also in the classic version ?

@krieghund
ok tks

Hello, I am reading the rules for Guadalcanal. I have the following question : if a destroyer is damaged and returned to the home base, is its cargo destroyed or goes it with the destroyer to the home base ?

@krieghund
Ok, that’s clear. Tks

@krieghund
But that means then that if Japan first declares war on US, the US receives the one time bonus immediately regardless of an unprovoked declaration of war by Japan to UK/ANZAC ? So, in my example, US receives the 30 IPC bonus in the 3th round after the declaration of war by Japan (and after the attack on the Philippines).
I thought that the bonus was only valid if Japan makes an unprovoked declaration of war to UK/ANZAC.
Is that correct, Krieghund ?
Greetings from Belgium.

@krieghund
ok Tks

@krieghund
Is it explained in the game rules ?

Hello. Let’s say Japan attacks the US in the Philippines in the 3th round after declaring war at the US and Japan is not yet at war with UK/ANZAC.
If later in the 3th, 4th, 5th,… round, Japan does un unprovoked declaration of war against UK or ANZAC, let’s say by attacking UK in borneo, does US still get the one-time bonus payment of 30 IPCs (= representing the total mobilization and transfer of military assets, but US is already at war since beginning of the 3th round !) ?

@andrewaagamer
indeed, very very interesting discussion. It only makes this powerfull game more attractive for me. I’m going to play now again Pacific 1940 and after that I’ll start to read the rules for the guadalcanal version… Curious about this specific rare game…

@surfer
That was my question : can the carrier leave during combat movement to avoid kamikaze attack. I follow Krieghund. You can only move during combat movement to perform a real attack. In my case there wasn’t really a combat goal by moving the CV.
It is only possible to move the CV during non combat movement but then it would already be to late to avoid kamikaze attack.

There wasn’t indeed no scramble.

@krieghund
That was my fear… Even when it is not explicit forbidden in the rulebook, it would be not a real combat move in order to do a real combat.
Tks

@krieghund
No, the aim was to do also an assault landing in the first sea zone, but indeed the carrier was already in place in this sea zone. In order to avoid battleship and cruiser bombardement, Japan could perform a kamikazi run against one of the ships. If Japan should kamikazi the carrier and succeeds (even with one hit), the fighters would be lost. So, in order to escape with the carrier during the combat move, I tried to move the carrier to an adjacent sea zone to “support” another assault landing on a territory without any japanese units. This would then be a move by the carrier without any combat goal but just to avoid the kamikaze attack. So, I was wondering if this is allowed. The fighters of the carrier supported the assault in the first sea zone.
Hopely this will clarify better the situation I was in…

In order to escape from a kamikazi attack on your carrier in a seazone were there isn’t any other safe landing zone for your fighters from your carrier (if kamikaze attack on the carrier succeeds), may you -during the combat phase!!!- let your carrier participate (without any combat value!) in an assault landing in the seazone next to the first on an enemy territory without hostile units, while your airplanes participate in a battle in the original seazone were your carrier was ?
So in that way if Japan wants to make a kamikazi strike in the first seazone, he has to do it on another warship and the fighters can land after battle safe on the carrier in the second seazone.

@ampdrive said in Where to place US IC ?:

I’ve always assumed that UK and Anzac units,when NOT at war with Japan ,can go to FIC while it still is owned by France

I think that their units can go to FIC but they don’t receive the territory’s income