Posts made by Yoshi

That’s what I was thinking, but was not totally sure.

Thanks for the answer !

One more sub question :

If there is a US transport and a japan sub in sz59. Japan turn, he attacks the transport with a fighter.

May the sub move during ncm or was it considered as participating to the combat (and therefore should move during the combat move) ?

I agree that Japan has to be considered, never pretented that you can ignore it. To my mind, US has to invest in the pacific, and quite a lot (I usually go between 80% and 100% in Pacific with USA).

And as for the 11IPC shifts, I agree. But UK actually invest 9-11 IPC and earns 3… so that’s 6-8 less against Germany / Italy. Of course, even trading it makes 3-8 more for Japan (according to if they were able to take Australia or not). But the money is in another place.

And specially in the early game, this money in Europa may reduce axis cash also…

But I do not have the answer : I did not play enough games until now to manage this scenario.

I am not sure that Uk can not build a IC anyway : yes, it will fall on J2, but it can be retaken by Russia and then UK can build and US can bring back some fighters (for instance). With the order of turn, it is not so easy for Japan to fight such a factory because UK will build there even if Japan took it. So most of the time, Japan must / may loose some air to take it, and the next turn there is again 5 grounds units there (just some random number : 2 from Russia plus 3 built)…

Of course, this means that Russia 2 must sent some units into India (and therefore at least two infantrys should move to Persia in R1), and this is not sure that they can not afford it.

Therefore, I do not know if it is possible for the allies or not.

Moreover, if Japan send everything against India, it will not stay alive (even traded) a lot of time. But during this time, China is annoying with their fighter, and US should come closer in the Pacific…

But I did not play so much game, and never faced such a move until now, so I dunno if UK can still do it. It is just that it does not look totally impossible to me.

But I am not sure that the India IC is the best either : combined with a 100% (or almost - one more cv in Atlantic and some ground units during the game may be a need) Pacific US it is very good against Japan. But in the main time Germany is very dangerous, and the money used in India lacks a lot in Europa.

ok, I did not get this point.

Thanks for all these explanations :)

@Krieghund:

@Yoshi:

This means that if UK want to kill these subs, and that the 8inf are in Finland, then UK cannot load them ?

Since the sea zone isn’t hostile, the units in Finland can be loaded.  However, since the UK is attacking, the transports must either remain and be involved in the attack, or move away during combat movement.  As a result, the only way the units can loaded is to use them for an amphibious assault.

OK, this is more the way I understood that.

Just to be sure : if they want to unload to a friendly territorry (abd still attack the subs), is it still possible (but in the combat move phase) ?

@Krieghund:

@DarthMaximus:

To add to the subs question.  What is the ruling on these Sz 5 scenerios:

UK has a loaded AC, 2 ca, 2 dd, 4 trns in SZ 5.  8 inf on UK.
Germany buys a sub and places it in Sz 5.

As the UK, if you intend on using your trns, you still must load during combat move b/c of the sub, correct?

No.  Subs do not make a sea zone hostile, and they can always be ignored.   The UK’s options will be limited only if it chooses to attack the sub.

This means that if UK want to kill these subs, and that the 8inf are in Finland, then UK cannot load them ?

So UK cannot ignore the subs to load the units and attack them in the same turn ?

But then I would have another question : UK has plenty of boats in sz2 (including destroyers, and to simplify let assume that they have no more air power), germany a sub in sz8 and Italy some boats in sz12. Then, UK has to choose between attacking sz8 or sz12 ?

@hobo:

Unless I read it wrong, subs can no longer be ignored for amphibious assaults, if they choose not to submerge. It’s a good change, since it would be stupid to think a sub would sit idle as a lone transport decides to invade the coast.

I asked there to be sure :

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=16872.msg565356#msg565356

(I think that the sentence quoted there is the one what make you say that)

Yoshi

Page 17, Amphibious Assaults - Step 3. Land Combat: The first sentence should read: “If there was no sea battle or the sea zone has been cleared of all defending enemy units except transports and submerged submarines, and the attacker still has land units committed to the coastal territory, move all attacking and defending units to the battle board and conduct combat using the general combat rules (on the next page).”

Just to be sure : does this make subs capable of stopping an amphibious assault, or can they still be ignored from step 1 ?

I believe that this clarification is just to be sure that if there is a combat (because there were something else than trannies and subs in the sea zone, or because the attacker wanted to attack - as for instance to clear the trannies), and if after some rounds there are only subs, they cannot be ignored suddenly by the attacker. Am I right ?

@hobo:

subs can defend against amphibious assaults.

Could you point out what make you think so ?

I read the FAQ, but did not catch this information…

I just saw changes on heavy bombers and paratroopers…

@JWW:

What new FAQ rules have just come out?

It is here :

http://harrisgamedesign.com/pdf/A&A_Anniversary_FAQ.pdf

1.  DarthMaximus
2.  BigRedOne
3.  cts17
4.  hobo
5.  Battlingmaxo
6.  U-505
7.  Amon Sûl
8.  Bigbadgoo
9.  souL
10.  SpiralArchitect
11.  axis_roll
12.  Bardoly
13.  Funcioneta
14. Yoshi
15. 
16.

If there is no destroyers with the fighters, the subs can not be hit by air.

Therefore, if it is fgts against 1carrier and two subs, the subs are not involved in the combat, since they cannot hit and cannot be hit.

@Zhukov44:

Why the different opinions on balance?  For one thing, playing dice/tech (more popular here) means more Allied wins because of the greater variability, while in a ll/nt game, it’s less likely for Axis to lose their advantage and Allies can’t win on account of a lucky tech in the opening rounds.

That’s a main point. A dice game and a low luck one is definitely not the same game. I believe that low luck definitely gives a big advantage to axis, because it gives advantage to the attacker, and that the first round includes plenty of attacks.

To give an example, I will consider 5 of the main (and quite common and important) attacks for axis rd 1 : Egypt, Yunnan, sz35, sz 56 and sz Z3 (I consider a no tech game here, and percentages come from tripleA calculator).

Egypt with all that can reach : 75% with dices, 95% with low luck.
Yunnan with 3inf, 1fgt : 82% with dices vs 98% with low luck.
sz35 and sz 56 with 2fgt : 95% with dices vs 100% with low luck.
sz 53 with 1DD, 2fgt : 90% with dices vs 100% with low luck.

All these attack combined : 50% with dices vs 93% with low luck.

So of course, you can go in Yunnan with one more fighter, but as you can see, in low luck, you do not really need that, and can use the extra fighter again another chinese territory fo instance. This is just an example, I am not claiming that this is the correct opening for all of these battles. But I think that several people manage these battle like that.

The conclusion to my mind : in low luck, axis is stronger. So speaking of balance must take into account what you are playing with. It is possible (even if I have no idea if this is the case) that Allies need a bid in low luck, but that the game is balanced with dices…

nope, they stay alive

According to the board, Russia can also make a 6tnk purchase, put the inf usually used to stack Caucasus between Russia, Caucasus (just  and Persia (a threat against Japan, even if they just take back Caucasus next turn), take back BST (giving another front to deal with for Germany). And then, you have enough units to take back Caucasus strongly, so that Germany cannot take it anymore.

Of course, this is just an example of possible reaction. A lot depends of G1 other moves and dices.

@Subotai:

@a44bigdog:

However if things go bad for Japan there seems to be very little the Axis can do, even taking out Russia with Germany may not be enough.

This is definitely wrong. If Moscow falls to axis, it is game over 100% certain, if axis does not lose any capitals

But if Japan is reduced to 8ipc, it is like if the Allies got it. So, no it is not 100% certain. Because in the scenario described by A44 (Japan has been reduced to its island and after Germany took Moscou), UK will have Africa and a lot of units on the road between Algeria and India. Allies will get Pacific. So we are speaking of US at around 60ipc, UK around 55, and there is a big stack in Chinghai (China is producing 4inf a turn). Italy is reduced to Europa, so between 9 and 15 (if they took some Russian territories), and Germany is really big (around 70-80).

For sure Germany will be hard to contain, and they will make some progress in Asia to balance the game a little more. But it is definitively not a 100% victory for Axis.

You should put an option “no bid”. I think that it could have some answers, and this is really different than 5 or less

Thanks !

I believe that a CV can be produced in a sea zone where there is an ennemy fleet (you can produce as many vessels or fighters - if there are enough CV with - in this season can’t you ? ). But can a fighter wait this CV during his non combat move there, even with the ennemy fleet ?

@anchovy:

3.  Control of Moscow and all territories (and aa guns) under allied control revert to Russian control.

Unless I’m wrong, the AAguns are not converted to Russia when Moscou is liberated. They stay what they are