Posts made by Noneshallpass

Note that Free France may only declare war on Italy if it has declared war on another nation during the game (Free France NRS v3.2).

The US NRS says France, not Free France. They are not the same power.

@hbg-gw-enthusiast

Interesting comment. I admit that I missed that one on page 35.

However, I still have a problem with planes pulling double duty, such as fighting in the naval battle and then declaring MAP when the carrier is sunk.

Plus, if the carrier is sunk, they are not « aircraft on Carriers » anymore. MAP aircraft still needs to have a legal landing within range (see Elimination also on page 35).

I confirm that the FAQ was updated, as the carrier question was not there a few days ago.

My understanding before the FAQ updated was that since we did not have the equivalent to the A&A rule, the carrier-based planes did not have a 1 movement to land and were lost.

Regarding the switch to MAP, I don’t think that you are allowed to do this during the opponent’s turn with defending planes. MAP is a form of combat movement (rules 8.2 and 8.7).

In case you did not see it, there are 60+ posts in a recent thread on MAP.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/36587/subs-destroyers-map-and-other-ships/51

You are right that the fortifications only protect the border they are on and can therefore be flanked.

If the attack comes from two different territories, then the fortification’s first strikes should only hit the enemy units coming from the fortified border.

As for the defense bonus to defending units, it applies « to all other land units in the zone », so I would tend not to make the distinction.

The possibility to win a free Blue Division/International Brigade infantry unit each turn after a win can also represent a 30+ IPP boost over the course of the game for either Germany or the USSR, which is a good return on the investment.

Even in a two player game, Germany should invest in the SCW because the lend-lease represents a much smaller fraction of its income than the USSR’s and so these ressources are not spent on the defense of the USSR as long as the Civil War drags on.

I don’t see how any side can afford not try and win the SCW and just give Spain to the other side.

This is a definate yes. According the German NRS :

« Once per game, and prior to January 1941, all German land and air units may make an additional sequence of combat moves, combat (including blitz) and non-combat movement. The second round of attacks takes place immediately after the end of the first non-combat movement. Units with blitz may use this ability both rounds if possible. »

There is no suggestion that this special ability is restricted to one territory. You can use it in multiple territories and on all available fronts.

You can also wait to decide after the first sequence if and where you will make a second round of combat moves, depending on how things go in the first round.

A strong argument for the German player to be ready to go to war before January 1941.

Hello,

There are no references in the rules to the mechanics of the border clashes, except to explain the effect of the Japanese-Soviet non-agression Pact (14.3).

The only relevant info is found on the Japan and USSR NRS:

« Japan and the Soviet Union may engage in border clashes. Either side may attack units on the other side of a jointly held land border in 1 round of combat but all units must start in an adjacent zone (aircraft may not be brought in from different zones). Neither side may capture land zones from the other without a declaration of war. Border clashes end if/when the Japanese-Russian non-aggression pact is signed (14.3) »

If you look at the Mountains rule (1.8) it says:

« Units are subject to Mountain rules on the first round of combat when crossing a mountain border and on all combat rounds in a mountain zone. »

Since the clash is described as « 1 round of combat », I see no reason to ignore the terrain of the territory that you are attacking if you are playing with the Mountains optional rule.

Even if you consider that the attacker is not actually crossing the border, the simple fact that the defenders are in a mountain territory would still justify the -1 Attack penalty.

Hello, I have not played with these specific rules, but one possible interpretation could be that the fighter must be based and return there, in practice limiting his combat moves to the Eastern coast of Spain. Does this make sense?

Considering :

1- That the Diplomacy Chart has different starting positions for all Major Powers, both Axis (Germany, Japan, Italy) and Allies (USA, UK, France), and the USSR.

2- That rule 2.3 of the Expansion states :

" If the player’s roll is successful, the player moves his roundel one position and moves one roundel from any other Major Power from another Alliance down one."

It seems pretty clear that each Major Power is completely independent and that there may be multiple members of an alliance attempting to influence the same country at one time.

So only the nations matter.

Part of the Chinese Civil War rules that the CCP and KMT can form a truce.

The only downside with 2 players is that the controlling player has no incentive to break the truce with himself and can choose to make strategic attacks against Chinese Warlords to turn their units and territory to the other faction.

However, this is still closer to the rules than having the Japanese play one Chinese faction.

On the broader picture, the same is true for Allies and Comintern if they are played by the same player. You would not give the Axis player control of one faction or the option to force a conflict between them.

It’s not ideal playing a three-player game with only two, but it still makes for a challenging game. The rules are complicated enough has they are.

Some retreat concepts are found in the Winter War expansion where ski troops in defense may retreat and in the Deutsch Afrikakorps expansion where armor units may retreat even if they are the Defender.

The desert terrain rules (1.9) also force Attacking vehicle-class units to retreat on a roll of 12.

The “Attack Weakness” Special Ability states that each KMT regular infantry and cavalry that rolls a 10 or more retreats from the battle to the zone it attacked from.

If there was any doubt, with the 1939 setup, some powers start with tech at stage 1 or 2, for instance Japan has Long Range Aircraft (Stage 1) and Heavy Battleships (Stage 2).

Therefore, all other tech are at zero (no marker on the Technology Chart), so you indeed need four successes to complete a tech.

Also remember that if you start in 1936, you cannot research beyond stage II before July 1939 (Rule 7.6 and Global War Tech Sheet), which should also prevent all nations from ending up with all the techs.

I have yet to see a game when even the technology superpowers like Germany and the USA have acquired everything.

@HBG-GW-Enthusiast Sorry if I confused you with my previous comment. I think that when you consider that one MAP is enough to stop all subs and then you place all of them on the battleboard as @Trig pointed out, it makes things simpler.

I does not mean that the MAP and DD will actually get a shot at each sub, considering the possible option to submerge, just that they are part of at least one round of naval combat and that is enough to stop them in that zone. The extra subs just don’t get a free pass because they outnumber the MAP aircraft.

At least my dubious answer got you to clarify things!

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in Subs, Destroyers, MAP and other ships:

3. MAP + friendly naval units can force moving enemy submarines into naval combat on the enemy turn, correct?

The MAP aircraft alone can force that if it wishes and does not need friendly units (rules 8.7 + 8.9).

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in Subs, Destroyers, MAP and other ships:

2. 1 MAP + 1 DD vs multiple submarines, only 1 submarine participates in the combat. Correct?

I think that the 1:1 ratio in rule 8.9 applies to the MAP and destroyer, so that you cannot send multiple destroyers to hunt subs if you only have one MAP aircraft, not the ratio vs the subs.

I believe that the 1 MAP + 1 DD would get a shot at each sub in that zone.

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in Subs, Destroyers, MAP and other ships:

1. Sole aircraft on MAP with no friendly naval units vs multiple submarines - 1 roll, but can stop them all?

Rule 8.7 says that an aircraft on MAP may choose to engage in combat with “naval enemy units” that are in its sea zone and that defends against “enemy units” entering its sea zone. In both instances there is the use of plural, so I don’t see that you need to have a plane for each submarine.

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in Subs, Destroyers, MAP and other ships:

Page 35, Maritime Air Patrol, Starting a Patrol: “Move aircraft into position within range and place a Maritime Air Patrol marker underneath.”

Does anyone do this? First, is there even a MAP marker we can purchase? Second, do we really need to do this? If there is a plane flying in a sea zone, it’s on MAP, right? Third, how does it work if someone wants to fly MAP in a sea zone where you are also going to have naval combat. Say you are moving 2 BB’s, 2 CA’s and 2 CL’s into a sea zone containing an enemy BB, CA, and CL. You also fly a sea plane into that sea zone on MAP and decline to participate in the naval combat. So you fight out the naval battle without the sea plane, correct?

HBG has a “Combat Air Patrol” marker which can serve that purpose. CAP was introduced in Axis & Allies Pacific, I believe.

If you don’t have the markers, a colored chip under the plane can do the job.

I think it’s a good practice to distinguish between your aircraft left on MAP an aircraft that must return to base during the non-combat move, as they do not have the same range.

Vichy units are not in Paris, so nothing happens to them when Paris is liberated.

Only taking Southern France makes them surrender, pending clarification on if an when the are to be replaced by German units.