Posts made by gsh34

@Krieghund:

@gsh34:

In our game, UK Pacific started to march troops west to get the troops and income in pro-Allied Persia. Persia is located on the European board though.  Who gets this income?

Europe.

@gsh34:

Also, a question on the UK NO’s.  While it didn’t state it in the rule book, we agreed that the NO regarding all German subs cleared from the board should go to UK Europe.  How about the other NO.  It requires the UK (and I think ANZAC) to own all original territories.  Is it my choice to split that NO income as I see fit?  This can matter since UK Europe and UK Pacific income is kept separate.  If I can choose, could I split it, say, three ipc to Europe and two to Pacific?

From page 34 of the Rulebook: “The United Kingdom’s objective is “The British Empire”—to retain control of
its old centers of power.  To reflect this objective, the United Kingdom Europe economy (see Global United Kingdom Rules, pg. 32) collects bonus IPC income during each of its Collect Income phases in the following situations.”

Thank you for the answer.  I have a couple more questions and I would like to apologize in advance if these are in the rule book (I don’t have it), but my game group missed it if it is.

India is split in two between the Europe and Pacific board.  W. India (I think that is what it is called) is on the Europe board but counts for the UK Pacific income, correct?

Italy and Russia both have NOs that talk about warships in the Med. or sz 125 respectively.  What exactly is the definition of a warship?  Does this include subs or transports?

If UK Europe falls, can UK Pacific “liberate” any of the territories on the Europe board and then collect that income?  I mean if the US liberates a UK Europe territory while London is captured, it gets the income.  I would think UK Pacific should be able to ‘liberate’ and collect UK Europe income too.

Thank you

I played my first game this weekend.  I am not the owner of the games, so I don’t have the rules or board to look at and I am going off memory for this question….

In our game, UK Pacific started to march troops west to get the troops and income in pro-Allied Persia. Persia is located on the European board though.  Who gets this income?  Also, a question on the UK NO’s.  While it didn’t state it in the rule book, we agreed that the NO regarding all German subs cleared from the board should go to UK Europe.  How about the other NO.  It requires the UK (and I think ANZAC) to own all original territories.  Is it my choice to split that NO income as I see fit?  This can matter since UK Europe and UK Pacific income is kept separate.  If I can choose, could I split it, say, three ipc to Europe and two to Pacific?

Thanks for replying in advance.

Is it possible that the Global FAQ sticky can be cleaned up to represent questions that are actually about ambiguous rules, errors, errata and such?  At seventeen pages long, I am sure a lot of questions gamers have had are cleared up but extremely difficult to find in a thread of that length.

Thanks.

I am envious of seeing yet another dedicated Global table.  Cool for you though.  Hey, I see you have dividers for your boxes.  Are those home made or purchased?

Bought the plexiglass at FleetFarm, eh???  You must be living in the upper Midwest.

If you haven’t done so already, I suggest sealing the edge of your plexiglass with silicone.  With the board being recessed, if anyone spills a drink it could go right under the plexiglass.

To say that table is awesome is about as descriptive as saying King Kong is a big ape.

Wow! 74 pages must be the longest single thread I’ve ever seen about one A&A topic.  A few questions for you Calvin since you were the originator of the thread:

Does any setup change also apply to Global?

It’s 11pm local time and I simply don’t have time to read the whole thing tonight.  Is the setup modification still being discussed or has Larry actually made definitive alterations that are buried in that monster thread somewhere?

Thanks for posting so quickly.
GSH

Every once in a while I read in a post about an alternate setup from Larry Harris, but have not seen it elaborated.  My play group is getting together for our first global game this weekend and would like to know what the changes are if this is true.

GSH

I actually have had the absolute worst dice and the absolute best dice of my hundreds of FTF games occur in the same battle.

A friend and I were new (insanely stupid new in fact) to A&A and playing the MB edition.  I was Germany and attacking Karelia late in the game.  This was one of the bloody huge 30+ units on each side type of fights.  The kind that determine the outcome of the game as I recall.  Out of my 30+ units, 12 were fighters.  His aa gun shot 11 out of 12 down!  At that point, he had taken out the vast majority of my firepower and I was down about 10 units on him.  Then the dice turned the other way once the battle started and I crushed him.  He had me out pipped by 3x-4x yet in all the rounds of battle, he only had four or five hits in defense on me.

The odds of losing 11 of 12 fighters to aa fire must be like winning the PowerBall lottery.  The odds of me then winning the subsequent fight also by a crushing landslide must have been like winning the Powerball three times.

Come to think of it, maybe winning that battle is why my luck has been so poor ever since…naaaaa

GSH

Romulus,

Speaking for myself as an American, I can say your grasp of English as you write it is very high.  You write very concisely.

After so many games of Revised, I am still filtering everything through that rule set.  It will take some time (and games played) to really comprehend the magnitude of the rule changes and how it will affect the game compared to Revised.

@Krieghund:

@cousin_joe:

2. Is there any mechanism for the Sub to avoid the combat since there is no enemy DD present (eg. diving before the battle in lieu of it’s 1st strike?)

Yes, if there is no enemy DD present, a sub may sumerge instead of firing.  This happens at the beginning of each combat round, before any dice are rolled.  The attacker submerges first, then the defender.

So, an attacking sub can move into combat and submerge in the first round of combat without ever firing a shot if no destroyer is present?  If this is the case, destroyers are all the more important because by doing the above described move, a lone sub could prevent the next power from loading units during combat phase in a contested sea zone.

I have a question regarding transports in battle and their new found status as no longer being used for fodder.  Let me set this up with an example:

The attacker tries to do an amphibious attack.  Defender has two subs.  Attacker brings one sub and four transports.  Attacker hits on rd one (or misses doesn’t really matter) but the defender gets two hits in defense.  Of course, the attackers sub is dead, but what about the transports and the second hit that needs to assigned?  In this instance would you only lose one transport as the second hit and be able to retreat the other three?  Lose all four since they can’t be taken as fodder?  Lose no transports because of the ‘no fodder’ rule and be able to retreat all four?

To me, in cases where there are more hits than non-transport units, I would think that taking transports for casualties as needed would be the proper way to resolve it.