Posts made by MEGAEINSTEIN

1 SU is neutral to the other allies (even if it is at war with Japan) until it is at war with one or both european axis powers.

2 While not at war with each other, Japan are neutral to UK and ANZAC, so their air units cannot fly over each other territories.

3 Use the research tokens from Anniversary Edition.

4 as the rules say when you conquer a territory with a major industrial complex the icomplex becomes a small one. Rule: you can only build major industrial complexes in territories originaly controlled by your power

Map errata:
M1 portuguese Angola instead of Angola
M2 portuguese Mozambique instead of Mozambique
M3 Azores islands in the middle of the way between USA and Europe in Atlantic with a naval and air base UK controled (an agreement with the portuguese government).
M4 Mongolia with only one army instead of 6. Can be invaded with no consequence to the other pure neutrals. **Impassable mountains between Mongolia territories and SU territories (look at a map, these mountains are real and impassable)**This mountains would be represented the same way Sahara in Africa.
M5 Ireland is an island separated from Scotland

Forget the split.

The rule should be:

1 SU is neutral to the other allies (even if it is at war with Japan) until it is at war with one or both european axis powers.

2 While not at war with each other, Japan are neutral to UK and ANZAC, so their air units cannot fly over each other territories

Thanks.

The text you wrote gives no doubt, so it should replace what is written in the rulebook.

This is a open topic that was not officially solved.

At first thought from our master krieghund apparently yes. But seems not logical.

The rules will be altered probably with the following sentence:

“While Russia is not at war with one or both european axis powers, Russia treats all allies as neutral and vice-versa”

I have definitely not understood the rules due to kamikase attacks. Can you clarify them to me please (if i am japanese, when can i make the kamikase attack? During my turn or during other player turn?).

At first i thought that the japanese player could interrupt other player combat or non combat move through the sea zones with the kamikase simbol to make the kamikase attack.

1 when London is captured UK recieves no income. I think that this is false. UK still recieves pacific income

2 UK units from pacific cannot take control of europe uk territories when London is controled by the axis - this is a big mess and i don´t have an answer. It seems that for example USA can held a UK territory in Europe when london is captured, so why the UK pacific units cannot do the same?

3 UK europe and Pacific work out as if they were two different power - but R&D works simultaneous for both, but can in same turn be two developmnets, one from pacific income and other from european income?

4kamikase attacks can be in response to noncombat move and to combat move and may be declared if the enemy sea units are just passing by (this follows everything that is said in rulebook).

5 if i understood right, you said that a japanese fighter can fly over a british territory even if Japan and Uk are not at war with each other because they are both at war with someone else. I do not agree. In my opinion when Japan is not at war with UK, they are neutral to each other and so a japanese flighter cannot fly over a UK territory.

Please comment Krieghund

Paris is held by the axis. Can UK take control of the french territories in Africa (and their income) that are not held by an axis power yet?

Imperious leader your aa50 map is fantastic.

The aa40 map should have usa aligned around the map, the pacific and atlantic should be wider with one more vertical row of sea zones, including azores and the two rows of sea zones in mediterrain.

And please imperious leader make the map wider so that Atlantic can have one more vertical row of sea zones.

The problem with maps is that they are not spheric like the real world and as a consequence if we analize a globe sea is about 66% of the whole surface of Earth and in a scale world map is a little more than  50%.

There was a pact between Salazar and General Franco (Portugal and Spain) to somehow protect both countries from a possible german invasion. So if Spain was attacked Portugal was supposed to join Spain and vice-versa.

Something very important:

To avoid a german invasion the trains from europe could not enter Spain because the rails had different measures in Portugal and Spain.

To represent this light infantry in aa could not move 2 spaces when moving from south france to spain.

This looks so ugly:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/784025/axis-allies-europe-1940?size=medium

And SAS is a very important game developer cause the most popular house rules in the past are now part of the game.

LOL

And neutrals can also include some aspects of pure deep political relationship:

• for example USA used Azores in the middle of Atlantic Ocean as an important/very important militar base, Azores are portuguese and Portygal was neutral for both sides during wwii.

This means A Territory belonging to a strict neutral but used by USA.

Hobbes the portuguese are so clever aren´t they?

Building something together is so out of the question?

Who cares the name of the base? Bases are not named till today in aa.

THE IMPORTANT ISSUE is to include Azores other Açores on the map due to its strategic location during wwii. Half way from USA and Europe.

LOL

SAS exactly. Anyway i think that due to the strategic location and relevance to USA forces during WWII Azores should be included on the map and Atlantic should be wider also.

This would bring a lot more deph to the game and more options to play, contributing to avoid standard repeated plays from one game play to another.

SAS thanks for the visualization.

Now i get it:

sea zones connect around the map (they are aligned in both maps).

Land zones are not aligned but we know how they connect.

I guess is the simple way to try to fix a bit this not aligment.

Anyway i would like that this didn´t hapen in future versions.

I have already said in this topic that i will buy the game and that the game seems to be fantastic.

AA is a working and evolving project.

If we don´t try to solve some problems, the game does not evolve and we all would be playing 1984 AA version.

In AA revised 2004 some theories said that you had to invest all your money in infantry instead of tanks.

Those were wrong theories because (and i am not going to explain the math and statistic) investing all the money in tanks allowed Germany to take SU capital in the first round (due between other things the 2 spaces moving capacity) and this severelly cripled SU saving lots of money in not destroyed units for Germany.

Now the tanks are too expensive and those theories about investing all the money in infantry gain sustentability.

•Alberta/Saskatchewan/Manitoba territory is adjacent to both Yukon and British Columbia territories.
•Central United States is adjacent to Western United States.
•Southeastern Mexico is adjacent to Mexico.
•SZ 11 adjacent to SZ 64
•SZ 28 adjacent to SZ 64
•SZ 51 adjacent to SZ 64. 65. and 66
•SZ 52 adjacent to SZ 66
•SZ 64 adjacent to SZ 11, 28, and 51
•SZ 65 adjacent to SZ 51
•SZ 66 adjacent to SZ 51 and 52

This was said by Jensen in preview 4.

Looks confusing.

To hobbes:

Big airport meaning very long landing strip (one of the longest in an island if not the longest). Allowed a canadian airplane full of passengers and no fuel, so with no motor supporting breaks, to land and the plane didn´t even had to use the whole lane.

The link you gave, if you read the part that says history, starts in 1946. During WWII Lages was a very important refueling location for both ships and planes and to support the ships with food and oder things. Because Salazar wanted to give an image of neutrality, this was not public knowledgment during WWII.

Yes is true that during cold war the base was used by planes to detect submarines among other things.

And during the war against iraq was very important to support planes.

A AA map where Atlantic is without Azores and Lages makes no sense.

My objectiv with this topic was that azores and lages are in future maps of AA games and was fast achieved with one of the main developers saying that Azores would be included.

Then you Hobbes appeared and after your appearence i am not so shure about the inclusion of Azores in futures versions of AA if people get to confused.

And Wild Bill we cannot forget following your exposure that the Axis may lose some units killing the ex strict neutral units, but recieves income from these ex strict neutrals after invading them, compensating somehow some units lost.