Posts made by kcdzim

Also, from a penalty standpoint, there’s no reason for Russia not to declare war on Japan on R1.  Declaring war doesn’t require them to make an actual attack, but it does open their territories up for friendly occupation, making it that much more obnoxious as a US bomber base.

@Gamerman01:

SBR question

The rule book says that after the air battle, the attacker divides his bombers in groups to send to specific facilities for bombing.  Then it talks about AA fire from the facilities, and says the attacker chooses his own casualties.

Does this mean that you roll separate AA for each facility?

Example:

I attack London with 4 tacs and 1 strat bomber.
No interceptors sent.
I divide my bombers into groups.  2 tacs at the air base, 2 tacs at the naval base, and 1 strat bomber at the IC.

Is it

1. Can you roll 5 dice all together and if there are any 1’s I can choose any tac I want?
   or
2. do you roll 2 dice for the air base, then 2 dice for the naval base, then 1 die for the IC?  So if the IC hits, I have to lose the strat bomber

I’ve always thought it was #2 but I am not 100% sure.
Thanks

It’s number 2.  Tacs would not be able to be valid targets at a factory as they cannot bomb the factory, so they need to be tracked at their individual targets.  You also can’t say, “oh, I’ll take all the casualties from the group hitting the naval base, because the air base and factory are more important”

@Gamerman01:

Are inoperative airbases (3 or more damage) incapable of launching rocket attacks or paratroopers?

Neither the tech rules nor the base rules address this specifically.  The air base rules only say that an inoperative air base can’t increase air unit range or allow air units to scramble.

I’m sure they can’t do either if they’re damaged to that point.

@Young:

I was told in FAQ over a year ago that units can be held in limbo for one round if the player is not ready to place a unit for any reason (this is bull crap). So what is it now… what if someone doesn’t want to place a lone transport because they didn’t see the bomber that could reach it? do they get a refund for that, are they forced to place it and lose $7, or is it only when you can’t place it due to IC capacity?

Only when you can’t place due to capacity.  If things didn’t go your way, or you missed a vulnerability, you have to place as best you can and hope your opponent didn’t notice.

But…  other than the requirement to locate a carrier, I’m not certain that you’re required to place optimally.  So, in theory you could place all land units at your only factory adjacent to a seazone, thereby causing your boats to get refunded.  But you’d have to have enough land units purchased and limited factories to manage that.

@bhughes1971:

So once my aircraft carrier moves, my fighter can no longer move even when the carrier stops?

No.  All units move independently of each other.  The carrier only acts as a landing space for the fighter (unless it’s a friendly fighter, not the carriers owners fighter).

When you move a fighter, you move from the seazone that the carrier is in.  And when you move the carrier, you don’t take fighters with you.  They’re in the air, and they have only the range starting from the seazone the carrier is in.  You don’t carry the fighters two spaces, then launch.  They’ve already “launched” at the start of your turn.

@Gargantua:

We used to play an “Axis, Allies, Comintern” variant… where either of the 3 sides could actually pull an independant win.

That solved all these kinds of issues.  I agree, Stalin should be able to invade whatever he likes.

And Allied units that enter original USSR territories should be “interned” - removed from the board with infantry (and infantry only) showing up back in their home capitals a couple rounds later in equal numbers to the units interned  :wink:

@Cow:

If you have a “chance” to win a battle you can plan to move your carrier through it on non combat.

Imagine a destroyer is blocking your carrier and you got 2 fighters, you can send 1 to the destroyer and the other 3 spaces away where it would land on your carrier after.

Yes, but that’s not what was asked, so let’s not confuse the issue.  It’s not about planning, it’s about whether it’s allowed to moved through a space where combat occurred.  And that is allowed.

There should be no rule language that states you cannot noncombat move through a seazone (or territory) that has been cleared during the combat phase.

As long at the carrier was not moved and was not involved in combat during the combat phase, the carrier is allowed to move through any empty space during the noncombat phase.  If the planes didn’t succeed in emptying the seazone of surface warships, then the carrier could not move into the seazone during the noncombat phase.

Additionally, subs and transports don’t make a seazone hostile, so the carrier could move through seazones that only contain subs/transports.

@Eggman:

@Krieghund:

I see your point.� This will have to be addressed in the FAQ, as the intent is that the Dutch territories are friendly to all Allied powers.� The only special privilege that UK-ANZAC is intended to enjoy is to take control of them while they are still Dutch.

That will mean at a minimum that USA/Russia/France could never move a land unit onto those territories while Dutch, but could possibly land a Fighter.

Again, Dutch territories are friendly to the Allies, just like any other Allied territory.  USA/Russia/France are always free to move a land unit there while still dutch.  They simply cannot take control of it without liberating it (as they don’t have the diplomatic ties that UK/ANZAC do).  And US must be at war (with any number of Axis powers, doesn’t matter which), while Russia must be at war with Japan.

Dutch territories are treated exactly the same as any other territory that is

a) friendly
b) lost their capitol.

The only difference between Dutch territories and say, French territories after Paris has been lost, is that the UK/Anzac have a special relationship that allows them to take control of them before they’ve been captured by moving a ground unit into it.  Typically you need to capture - this is the one of the two instances where control of a friendly territory passes to a friendly power.  The other instance is a neutral that has been attacked but not captured.

So when you’re confused about things, ask yourself how you’d treat normandy if it were still french.

Can you UK/Anzac/US/Russia land a plane there?  Yes, as long as it started the turn friendly and they’re not neutral.  Exactly the same as any other friendly territory.

The US is not barred from being in a dutch territory - they must be at war first, but then they’re allowed to move into it just like any other friendly territory.

As I recall, the official answer was:

Once a neutral is attacked it’s no longer neutral (not even pro axis or pro allies).  It becomes full on “friendly” to the opposing side, in so far as it’s even a landing space for them similar to Dutch rules.

Thus, you can fly over during noncombat after you committed to at least one round of attack in the combat phase, which I’m reasonably confident was the final answer (but I’ve been known to be wrong).

High price to pay for switch all other neutrals, especially since I can’t think of many territories where there’s not an equivalent flight pattern re route that would work in the same number of spaces?  I guess you’re thinking of attacking Spain to overfly and reinforce The Rock during noncom?

@P-Unit:

Which allies does Japan need to be at war to meet the following condition?  The way it’s written with the ‘/’ character and the “and/or” isn’t precise.

@rulebook:

When Japan Is at War with the Western Allies (United States, United Kingdom/ANZAC and/or France)

Any or all.

UK/ANZAC are linked powers, tied diplomatically to have the same war/peace status.  If you’re at war with ANZAC you MUST be at war with the UK and if you’re at war with the UK you MUST be at war with ANZAC.  So it reads:

USA and/or UK-ANZAC and/or France.

No.  You can only place facilities on territories that were under your control at the beginning of your turn.

@Young:

Is there any possible scenerio where a sub can block naval movement? In game now please respond.

no.  not ever.  subs and transports don’t block movement.  A sub can only block an unescorted amphibious assault.

@ch0senfktard:

I understand what you mean. I’m sure the rule is meant for original Pro-Axis, but I can’t really support that.
We’ll just have to wait for someone else to clarify, I suppose.

Chosen is right.

It means original German, original Italian, and original Pro-Axis and NOT neutrals that have been turned at some point during the game.

@Tbone36:

I got mine from
“santa” which by far one of the best Christmas gift.   :-D

another question

Europe 1940 second edition, i have France conquered and and few france units in Uk now what do i do for france? are they out of the game?

They still have their turn, they just can’t do anything besides attack or help defend.

@Spendo02:

Q. What happens if Japan attacks a Mongolian territory in the same turn that it attacks a Soviet- controlled territory that is adjacent to a Mongolian territory?
A. All of the other strict neutral territories will immediately become pro-Allies, and all of the Mongolian territories that are not captured by Japan will become controlled by the Soviet Union at the end of Japan�s Conduct Combat phase.

All of the strict neutrals on the Pacific map, or all of them on the Global board?

all on the global board.

@Quille:

The A&A Pacific 1940 2nd Ed. aircraft movement rules seem to indicate that we should count a sea zone and island group as one space when that is the destination.  The previous edition said to count the sea zone and the island group as one space each.  The new 1942 2nd Edition rules say the same thing.  Is the rule in the 1940 2nd Ed an error?  Or is it a new rule?  Or have I misinterpreted it?  Thanks.

You’ve misinterpretated something.  The rule should not have changed. I don’t have the rule language in front of me, but there should have been no revision to the previous rule.

@Juhlius:

Ah… :-) I saw it on the picture.
But still… There is missing a line then.
www.axisandallies.org/resources-downloads/setup-chart-for-axis-allies-pacific-1940-second-edition/

A&A.org is only as accurate as its members - it’s not affiliated with the publisher, and will have typos.

@Gamerman01:

You say “finally”, but USA goes immediately after Japan.  We’re not playing the original anymore…

Well, despite the fact that this may be the .2 FAQ, there is still holdovers and people who read this but play OOB .1 so I just wanted to reiterate that attacking uk/Anzac doesn’t immediately bring them into the war- it merely opens the door on their turn.