Posts made by VonDox

@trig That was what I was thinking as well. That it gets downgraded as soon as it’s either invaded or aligned. There are no other neutrals that have a medium factory so it’s a one off situation. The annexation of Bohemia was NOT a welcomed event ( with the exception of a minority of Germans who lived there ) so I think it should be downgraded to a minor factory if we are following a historical approach.

A follow-up question… If a NEUTRAL has a MEDIUM factory and it becomes ALIGNED to a MAJOR power does the factory get reduced to a MINOR factory or does it remain a MEDIUM? For example, I think Bohemia has 1 medium factory. Once it is aligned does it reduce to a minor?

Factories in conquered territories get reduced to smalls with no ability to upgrade them.

Since Bohemia, Austria and Slovakia are not home territories for Germany it would make sense even if they are aligned that the factories also get reduced… Correct?

Re: The FAQ Thread

On page 53 of the rule book it states: “A ZONE can hold more than 1 factory.”

If this is the case are there any limitations on building, for example, 2 or 3 major factories in BERLIN, and gaining 2 or 3 more tech roles as well as the production boost? I can’t seem to find anything to say it CAN’T be done.

Also, if the Soviets use the option of moving a factory it would stand to reason they could move it to Moscow (example) and thus have 2 major factories in that land zone, correct?
And, and additional clarification to the above USSR rule. Moving factories is not a one time event. The USSR can, if they have rail capacity, MOVE two minor or medium factories each turn OR they can move 1 major each turn. With the understanding that a factory that is getting moved can NOT produce war materials.

Do I understand the rules correctly?

@hbg-gw-enthusiast I appreciate the replies to my questions. Thank you.

One follow-up… But I think I already know the answer. The CCP starts off with only 1 territory. It’s only hope of really expanding it’s territory is to to ‘influence’ a warlord to join them and by doing so gain another territory or two. It’s original territory generates 2 IPPs. So they are very limited on options… Either use it to build infantry or militia or use that income to improve their rolls for recruiting a warlord.

There is no ‘path’ or option for the USSR to send aid ( lend-lease ) IPPs to the CCP until they gain a port, or have a control a rail line that has an unbroken line back to the USSR which, would need to go through Manchuria.

So, there is no option for the USSR to send them any lend lease IPPs, correct?

@hbg-gw-enthusiast I have a couple of questions that I would like to get answers on.

Question 1: The rules state that IF the CCP possesses a land zone adjacent to a Soviet-possessed land zone in the production phase it MAY purchase artillery and AA guns. These must be placed in this adjacent land zone.

My assumption is that this is a special form of LEND-LEASE just for the CCP. It does not indicate how much of either the USSR can purchase, so it could buy 1 or 3 and place them along the border with the CCP. I would also assume that on the CCP players turn would treat that it is a version of lend-lease and become CCP property that can be moved on the CCP non-combat movement phase? Regular LEND-LEASE can only arrive via a port or a rail line and there are no rail roads leading into China and what ones do go through Manchuria.

I am I correct?

QUESTION #2: Fortifications are built on the BORDER of a land zone. Again, my common sense indicates the player has to indicate what BORDER that fortification is protecting so if land zone borders 3 adjacent land zones it can ONLY protect ONE of those borders, not all 3. ( Exceptions would be those indicated in the rules such as islands, cities and special areas ). Is this correct?

QUESTION# 3: It is my assumption that ONCE the SCW is one by either side, the special events table is not used anymore?

Question #4 Upgrading infantry by paying 1 IPP to promote them to mobile infantry. I have seen some contradictory rules that seem to indicate you COULD upgrade them to MECH infantry as well for the same 1 IPP, is this correct? Or, you can upgrade an infantry to a motorized infantry from Y36 to Jan of 39 and then in JULY of 39 when mechs become available you can either upgrade to mobile infantry OR mech infantry. OR is it JUST that you can only upgrade an infantry TO a mobile infantry ONLY regardless of the year. To me, again, my common sense is pushing me to the later than the former that if you are starting in 36 you can upgrade to mobile infantry and when mechs become available you can do either. Because, to me, it doesn’t seem that there is no difference between upgrading a unit from an infantry to mobile infantry vs an infantry to a mech infantry. The only difference is that at the start of the game in 36 you don’t have access to mech infantry.

Sorry, if these are questions that seem simple but I couldn’t find any clarifications elsewhere so I guess they just assume that common sense would guide players on what the rules are supposed to mean.

@chris_henry That was the only downside as well that I could see but unless Germany decides to not attack France first and decides to attack the USSR which are very unlikely I am not overtly concerned about the loss of the bonus because Britain should be at war with Germany at this point and the USA should be very close as well. With the limited amount of IPPs Russia gets at the start the only way they can really help is by sending troops. They can build a fighter in Madrid but they have 8 IPPs and the plane costs 10… I just don’t see how the Republicans can even hope to win unless the allies support them or the USSR goes full intervention.

@delaja I am playing standard expansion module not the admiral version.

I keep reading the rules and I just don’t see a downside to going all in if I am playing the soviets? At 8 IPP to start minor intervention gives little help? Building a plane in Madrid takes to long. Am I missing something?

@hbg-gw-enthusiast Hmm… Yep, I went back to the sheet and your right… So, what can be done to help France then?? ( sorry to deviate from the topic at hand ) but what are some strategies that work? If you can’t send lend-lease until France is at war and no troops, it’s really up the French to hold out at least 1 turn I guess. Maybe you get lucky and you can land troops along the western coast if your the brits to prevent encirclement but that’s about it that I can see. Even the 39 set-up doesn’t help the French much… I guess I need to do some more research on this…

@insanehoshi It hit me 5 minutes after I posted that about the militia rule. As to the ‘at war with a common enemy’ point, does that also cover lend-lease as well? Could the US, UK send an extra 6 IPC’s each turn so France can build 3 militia so they can use their IPC’s to build artillery and planes? The US sent lend-lease to the UK without being at war against Germany? That could add up as much 30 IPC’s of lend lease and 15 militia would make a huge difference against a german invasion. On page 6 the rule states (v3) “A system by which major powers may lend IPP’s to, and produce units for, other nations without the lender necessarily being at war themselves.” The US has some restrictions on their ability to lend-lease and I think they need to meet. If I read the chart correctly they wouldn’t be able to give any aid to France until France is at war with Germany AND they have reached 15IPPs but I can find no restrictions on the UK which would mean instead of 15 they might only get 8 perhaps??

@generalhandgrenade I have a question building off the allies in Russia question… So, how SOON can the Brits begin landing troops in France?? Do they have to wait until war breaks out?? Or can they start moving infantry/militia into France as soon as turn 1 of GW 36? Since Germany begins by taking Austria they are already indicating aggressive moves on the continent. So wouldn’t it stand to reason that Britain would begin building up forces there sooner than later? They could dump a lot of militia in france and some quality units to help bolster and slow the German attack but if they can’t do anything until France is getting attacked they are going to get toasted and probably not take too many Germans with them? I can’t find a rule that states Britain is prohibited from sending troops as soon as turn 1?

Help?
THanks,

@bretters What attracted me to this game and still does is a more realistic representation of WW2. The special rules for Germany and other nations tries to capture the essence of the historical realities that were present. But Italy seems to run against the grain of that effort. The game is one by achieving victory points. Italy can score the maximum amount of VP’s by simply doing nothing the entire game and achieving it’s VP goals. While the Brits and the US are handcuffed through the entire game. There should be some ‘event’ or ‘trigger’ that allows the brits and the US to declare war. For example should the Italians reach x2 the number of IPP’s in units in N. Africa the British can attack them or if the Italians give any IPP’s to Germany or lend-lease that would be a trigger for the US. Lastly, just from a game play perspective it would suck to play Italy if the best strategy would be to just sit there and do nothing and as a result, win the game? How fun is that? Another solution would be to penalize all the ALLIES -10 IPPs for 1 round, maybe 2 rounds before that is lifted…

@chris_henry I am thinking that Chris is right. So far, in the games I have played with my friends the german player runs Italy, we don’t even try to assign it… why? They simply do 2 things. Build troops and some ships when they can. They keep shuttling troops to north africa to force the UK to do the same. If they don’t keep up in the arms race then the UK risks the chance of falling behind and creating an opening for the Italians to finally strike. All in all, I think this is a flaw in the game design. Italy when played well in A&A G40 can be a powerful ally for the Germans. It can create leap frog scenarios in Russia, if the UK drops the ball for even 1 round a good italian player can take some major ground in Africa and also storm into Asia. We have been considering just creating Italy as a ‘major-minor’ nation ( which it basically is ). It can help Spain, win in Abyssinia, build BB’s and on it’s very last turn take 2 nations. 4 victory points and done…

So my question has anyone developed any house rules that they think ‘work’ to fix this issue? So that Italy is an active participant in the game??

@trig Wow… you’re right… I guess I should have double checked that when they were building I just assumed they read were reading the sheets. I just looked at the Japanese sheet as well and the minor factory in REHA is not in home territory as well… BIG MISS… Well, it was our first full game play through and for some of the others they didn’t even get a chance to review the rules before they arrived.

@insanehoshi It does… For example if you look at the set-up chart for GERMANY in 1939 they start with the following techs ALL at stage 1: Adv mechs, heavy armor, jet fighters, adv. subs, strat rockets and heavy battleships for a total of 6. USA starts 1939 with the following: Heavy bombers, heavy carriers, heavy battleships and attack transports all at stage 1.

I guess, based on the fact that GERMANY has 6/ea tier 1 techs to start off with in 1939 would indicate that you CAN STOP researching 1 tech line and start another.

I have toyed around with the idea that no tech can NOT go beyond tier 1 (July 1939) instead of tier 2 in the 1936 scenario. So you could have, maybe, if you were Germany or the US 10 or 12 tier 1 techs in 1939 if you got slightly above tech rolls. This would mean the soonest techs could hit the game if you got all 3 rolls would be July of 1940… Which would mean the first TECH/advanced units wouldn’t hit the board ( moveable ) until Jan of 41. To me that is more reasonable

@insanehoshi Germany upgraded the factory in eastern Germany to a major and then built another factory (major) in East Prussia. So he had a total 6 rolls a turn! ( not all starting in 1936 of course ).

One of the things that attracted me to this game was the tech and how it’s played. What I had not expected/failed to understand was the ability to stop researching a tech line and then start a new one. If agree 100% with you that before I start making house rules we need to play more and we are planning to do the 1939 start this time and with the tech positions as indicated. We will see how it goes… Yes, I did want to throttle the german player because of the luck he was having…

@chris_henry According to the rules on pg# 41 ( we had this scenario pop up on us this weekend during play ) it states: “If units from ADJACENT land zones are attacking at the SAME time as amphibiously assaulting units, amphibiously assaulting units must be chosen as casualties first.”

So, in our real life example we had an attack that had both types of attack. The attacker had to take 1 hit. He had 1 marine and 1 infantry. The player wanted to take the loss against the infantry but felt he had to only take the loss of the ONE infantry since he didn’t have another infantry to take the loss. We told him that he could take the marine as the loss and still be in compliance since a marine does NOT take double damage on amphibious landings. It was the only logical way to handle the loss and that it still met the rules. If he had taken 2 hits then one hit could be absorbed by the Marine but the other hit would go against the infantry and it would die thus spoiling the invasion landing. Now, here is the sticky part!!! If the amphibious landing fails and it’s a joint attack the rules read as follows: “The units attacking from adjacent land zones are able to retreat.” So we understand that to mean that if the amphibious landing fails then the land invasion HAS to retreat as well. Is that how everyone else handles that???

@aldrahill Yes, our german player was very lucky in our last game… While I, the USSR was not and had only 3 techs on the board by the time he attacked me in 1940. Nothing like changing history when jets, heavy armor, advanced artillery and advanced mechs are pouring over your border. He blasted pass and me drove into the Caucasus and got Turkey and Iran both on his side. The game was over by then since he had upwards of 90 IPPs and Japan had all of the Netherlands Islands and most of China and was over 70 IPPs.

I look at the 1939 set-up charts and none of the nations have tech beyond stage 2 except Japan with heavy BB’s at stage 2. Since many of the tech rolls are 7+ it’s almost 50/50 odds you make it a tech or not. I think my group could solve it’s tech issues by not allowing a nation to research more techs until they finish a tech line. This would slow the introduction of tech (if your playing the 36 opening ) to something similar to what is shown in in the 1939 tech levels for that opening set-up. There is nothing in the rules that state you are allowed to switch to a new tech line if your playing the 36 game and there is nothing to say that you can’t.

@aldrahill My A&A group has always struggled with TECH and it doesn’t seem any different in GW36. In our last game Germany had 13 of the 16 techs by the end of 1941. While the US had 8 of the 16 techs because of some bad rolls. I guess we might need to make a house rule that once a tech is started you can’t stop researching it unless you want to lose that advance OR you have to move back 1 stage so you can start another tech. So even if you get lucky in make 10 rolls in 2 turns and you want to switch over to a new tech those stage 2 techs drop down to stage 1. Does anyone else have an issue of run-away tech OR is that what everyone expects/wants in this game?

@trig Okay… So, based on the replies…

1. It’s 4 rolls to get to a tech. A roll to get on the chart to stage 1, 2 more for stage 2 and 3 and then 1 more for complete. Once you reach COMPLETE you get the tech immediately on that round so you build JETS or get wartime income ALL in that turn.

2. What I am NOT understanding yet is that if you start in 36 and you start 4 techs then have to hold at stage 4 can you start ‘researching’ four MORE techs and get them to stage 2 as well? It would seem to me that once you start a tech, if you stop and switch to another tech you should lose that tech advance you had been working on. Otherwise, Germany and the US run amok in tech advances. The only problem is that Germany gets a HUGE jump on the US on units built and the advantages of having that tech which is a huge game imbalance. I can find no rule in the game that states you have 1 roll per major factory and once you start researching a tech you can’t stop and switch to another tech and keep the advancement level of that previous tech at whatever stage you were at.