Posts made by RedIndian

Guest said in Minor Threat's Alpha+3.9 (Global 1940) COMPLETE! Setup Charts:

Wow, these are super, muchos gracias :-D

And now KICKS SELF FOR NITPICKING
-United States card: NOs #1 and #4 the word ‘Sovereignty’ spelled wrong (extra ‘i’)
-UK card: UK (London) operations: the phrase ‘exclusively only’ seems redundant, just ‘exclusively’ would do (same on India card)
-UK card: the word ‘Canadian’ spelled wrong (extra ‘n’)
-Japan card: NO #1 the word ‘resource’ spelled wrong (second ‘s’ instead of a ‘c’)
-ANZAC card: wording of NO #2 seems weird ‘Strategic cornerstone - to far East British Empire’. Does this miss the words ‘Malaya considered’?

KICKS SELF AGAIN

Beside these little wording mistakes, they are still great and stick to the latest updates and rules!

While I checked my stuff again I found something but I am not quite sure if there is a benefit when you will change it:

It is not necessary but you could add the (2) for all anti-aircraft gun at DEFENSE… they only occur when Radar is researched…
Fighter Attack (4) when Jet Fighters
Submarines --> Super Submarines (3)
Heavy Bombers Roll 2 Dice (but not easy to show this while not causing confusion)
Etc…

and maybe on the turn sequence to add the polictics move “to declare war”

Just suggestions, no need! As said above, maybe you should leave it like it is… The player should use a Research Board, so that they can see which technology they got… hopefully they do not forget it during the game ;)

@winteradler said in WinterAdler's Customization - G40 Setup Card Deck & more:

Hey everyone!

I am currently working on a game document.
The aim is to provide a better game overview and more comfort.
By means of national markers it is possible to mark out the grayed out symbols.

I would like to have a list of units,
Enter the ipc, bring in diplomacy and the victory cities.
Unfortunately, I have not found a solution for it, so the game underlay is not too big …

In 2012 “Minor Threat” aka “Children” created a nice design: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/16491/minor-threat-s-alpha-3-9-global-1940-complete-setup-charts?page=1

Just saw your ideas… I think his work is awesome!

I like your idea with cards for each land. Maybe I will use them and change design etc… Thanks for sharing your work!!!

@matttodd1 first link doesn’t work… u meant: www.siredblood.com/community

I still got an PDF file but it contains errors as some page have errors (white pages or not completely downloaded)

Great Idea!

But it doesn’t work for me… same problems as Athlim had… Can anyone help?

To add:

I noticed the Iron Cross or “Balkenkreuz” you used for the German cards are not the ones used in WW2. You took the current Balkenkreuz of the German military --> Bundeswehr. It looks similiar to the medal Iron Cross of WW2.

But the Wehrmacht used a different Iron Cross / “Balkenkreuz” for their vehicles, planes etc… , see i.e. A&A orignal marker.

@siredblood Good job!!! :+1: - When I was looking for cards with all objectives I came to your youtube link. It’s funny - I had the same idea but I created the rules etc. with bigger charts years ago. I think it is good to have some rules in short to clarify some questions during games.

Just one question: Why are the German cards not colored, too?

I still like these charts ;)

@Caesar:

@ShadowHAwk:

@RedIndian:

Ok here are another 3 :D

2. USA : (US in first 3 rounds when not at war)

Beside the “No-China-Rule”
Are any ships and airplanes of the US allowed to go through seazones which are adjacent to Japan controlled islands? Yes, aren’t they? Unless they don’t park there/ end the movment adjacent to a Japan controlled island or territory, right?

I found this a bit weird rule as it also bars US from staging ships near singapore which is a major naval base for the UK.
But the rules are the rules :)

It is clear the US cannot attack before turn 4 without being attack is G40’s attempted to get AnA closer to historical actions. US was big about Monroe Doctrine. The bigger question is why USSR cannot attack before Turn 4. I know it’s about the pact between Stalin and Hitler but anyone with a brain knew Stalin was going to attack eventually.

I don’t know why you focus on that now but I will give you an answer.
Stalin’s plan was to wait until all the other powers have weaken each other, so that the USSR is able to conquer the world easily. (he said this on a party meeting of the communism in the 20’s)
Anyone who still says the USSR was nearly or ready to attack the Germans by 1941 is a liar!
The Russians weren’t ready (just had their “great purge”) at all. And as I said, they wanted to wait until there would be a chance later on!
So to me the rule does make sense. It makes it more historical. And if Germany invades & conquers UK, you have the chance to declare war. (this covers Stalin’s plan to wait, although no one know what happened if…)

For the Pacific, the USSR was interested in getting their territories back they had lost years ago against Japan.
But they weren’t strong enough at this time to do this without any help. The navy of the Russians in the Pacific wasn’t strong enough to face the Japanese.

Since 1932 there were several boarder conflicts between USSR and Japan in the north of Mandchuko. Finally in April 1941 both countries signed the  “Soviet�Japanese Neutrality Pact”.
Although many Allied partners of those both countries tried to push them into war with eachother (US the USSR against Japan / Germany Japan against Russia), they never came into war. (Russia needed the troops for Europe, Japan against China, US and all the other pacific campaigns)
Ok at the very last days Russia took some territories but only after all other combats in Europe were done!

So as a German I can give you the advice, be careful what you’re saying. This argument pushed by other nations until 1980s / 1990s justified the attack of the Germans in June, 22 1941. As some of the German Veterans say. Those people were told this, just to make this attack a right and justified one. They (Nazis) even said, this was a defending attack, although it was planned by Hitler for other purposes. Anything else is “Propaganda” or in Trump’s days “fake news”

Historians from different nations proofed this.

So no, Stalin doesn’t want to attack Germany that early! Maybe later, but there are no concrete hints for that in comparison to the Nazis.

Thanks for the quick answer!

In this case it’s quite easy to understand what is written in the rules.

I read the Scrabmle passage on page 16 again and without the clarification by Kriegund & Panther
I wouldn’t understand it like this.

Maybe there should be a more detailed description in the rules for the special case I’ve given above.

Hey guys I have another question:

Similar to the “Scrabmle” rule.

Seems to happen not often, but just if.

SBR-defending-units are losing their territory. As they have already participated in combat, they are not allowed to defend the territory.
So can these former “Interceptors” used as casualties during the following combat of the territory (SBR has already been taken) or are these units completely passive?

Are they destroyed or do they have also the ability to move 1 space during NCM?

Hope you got it.

Thanks!!!

Ok thanks again ;)

Ok here are another 3 :D

1. Convoy:

Example:
India captures French-Indo-China from Japan. Japan has surface warships in seazone 36. So is there a convoy-disruption taking place by the collect income phase of the Indian player (or GB Pacific)? Or not, 'cause it has been captured in this turn. So it is too early for taking this step?

In general: If you take control of an enemy territory (with min value of 1) that is adjacent to a seazone , that has a convoy symbol and it contains surface warships of your opponent, will there be a convoy disruption by the collect income phase of the player which just captured this territory in this turn?

2. USA : (US in first 3 rounds when not at war)

Beside the “No-China-Rule”
Are any ships and airplanes of the US allowed to go through seazones which are adjacent to Japan controlled islands? Yes, aren’t they? Unless they don’t park there/ end the movment adjacent to a Japan controlled island or territory, right?

3. USSR (first 3 rounds when not at war)

Is the USSR-player allowed to move landtroops into Northwest Persia during his nom-combat-move when he is neutral/not at war?
No, 'cause as a neutral nation, he is only allowed to do at war, right? (Distinction between Europe & Pacific map)

In general: Is any nation allowed to take controll of a friendly neutral territory in his non-combat-move?
No! Only if this nation is in a state of war, right?

Ok I got it now.

2 for Europe and 1 for Global ;)

@ChromiumAgeCollector:

Are these all up-to-date?  I am going to print a set out for a game on Saturday. :)

I think so!

Ok thanks! :-)

So, 2 British Inf for Egypt or 1? (As I said, I can’t post a link here)

Danke! Bin hier schon seit Jahren ;) (arent’t you at DAAK, too? I guess I know you from that page)

Ok. I thought it has to move from UK not from the seazone.

So are you 100% sure about this? 'Cause this point was very discussed in my last playing round.

Some other questions:

1. All troops have to retreat into the same seazone or land, right? (At least only to those places that one ship or landunit attacked from)

2. Can I reatreat alhtough I’ve won the battle? No, right? (The purpose is to clear the land free of enemies troops, so that another allied can capture it in his round)

3. Since all attacks happen at the same time, there is no chance to prevent your enemy/oponent from scrambling in the same turn by doing SBRs on his airfields, right?

4. Latest update: I’m quite confused. Is there a new one? Thought in global 1940 2nd ed alpha +3 (latest?) only 1 British Inf in Egypt , not 2 !?
   (I wanted to post a link, but I’m not allowed to -.-)

So thanks again!

Should be the last ones I had.  :-D

@Krieghund:

@ShadowHAwk:

Not sure if you can actualy do this as planes of a neutral coutry cannot land on any other countries carriers.
What scenario do you have in mind where this can actualy happen?

While air units of a neutral power can’t land on another power’s carrier, it’s possible that a power could be at war with some enemy powers (and thus not neutral), but not the power that’s actually attacking.

Yes exactly this is how it was meant. Sry I didn’t give an example.

Thank you very much for all your quick answers! :wink:

Ok I got it. But not for the “Scramble-Rule”

Let’s say GB is attacked by Germany in Seazone 110 and decides to scramble. GB wins this battle, so the fighter will be back in the UK in the Non-Combat Move?
But Germany invades UK from Seazone 109 and wins the battle. So UK is captured by Germany in the Combat-Move and the scrambled fighter in seazone 110 can’t land in UK anymore. So where does it move from one space. From Seazone 110 or from the captured UK?

Or did I get it wrong and the scrambled fighter has already to land directly after the seabattle in 110. So it is already in UK when Germany invades the UK but it can’t participate in this battle, 'cause it has already done in 110?

Wow I didn’t know that about the Dutch territory.

Thanks guys. I wrote down some other questions for next time. After years of playing, there are some special situations where I wished to have Krieghund :D

Can I have your number? :D Just kidding! 8-)

Hey guys,

good evening from Western Germany!

Sorry for being lazy, but I read too much rules, questions, posts and I still got some questions. The German community isn’t really active, at least not for A&A Global 1940 2nd edition.
Anyway, after couple of yearsI started to play this game again.
Although there are still some things I don’t like (i.e. where Berlin or Poland is located), it is definitely the best A&A!!!
I don’t like the French having Russian pieces but ok.

Enough bla bla :D

So my questions are:

1. What happens to airplanes (of a nation that is not at war with the attacker) on a friendly carrier which are attacked?
   Are these planes seen as “cargo”, so if the attacker destroyes the carrier the planes are destroyed too? (or are they allowed to move 1 space?)
   I would say they are destroyed, but still want to be sure.

2. AC vs Submarine. 2 submarines attack an ac with 2 fighters on it. Submarines can’t hit airplanes, so if the AC is destroyed, what happens to the 2 fighters?
   Are they destroyed or do they have their chance to land safely one space from it?

3. What happens to planes that should land on a ac but it got lost in that round. So the attacker wanted to land his fighters (which have no moves anymore,  'cause it was their 4th they took into this attacking seazone) in the same zone which the attack has happened. Are they destroyed or do they have this “one-moving-rule” ?

4. Scramble: The land of the scrambled airplanes is captured by the enemy. From which place are they allowed to move one space? From the seazone or from the territory they took off?

5. Reatreat: Classical situation. You want to do an amphibious assault but you lost the seabattle. All warships from the attacker are destroyed in the 1st round but he still has some transports. So he can reatreat by the beginning of the 2nd round instead of keep fighting, right? But he is only able to reatreat, 'cause the defender didn’t hit them in the last combat move, right?

6. Subs: There is no destroyer, so the defending sub can decide to submerge at the beginning of every combat round? Let’s say the defending subs fight 2 rounds, and are still alive, so are they able to decide to submerge in combat round 3?

7. Dutch territory: Are the Dutch territories seen as “Pro-Allies” or as an Allied country that has lost his capital city?
   Are Allied planes allowed to land on these fields when they are still Dutch or only if they become ANZAC or British or American?

So I hope you guys got all my questions. Sorry for making this post, but it would take too long to read all these posts you guys have already made.

I would be glad to get feedback soon ;) I hope my English is readable and understandable :D

Thanks a lot!

I love these one! Again, great job!