They are separated. You need a transport
Covered by @squirecam
You are correct. If Japan does not attack the US, the US is not at war. On the US turn, the US can declare war on the Japanese. So if a mix of US and ANZAC forces were in SZ54 of Queensland, for example. The Japanese could declare war on the ANZACs and not the US, and attack the fleet. The US forces would just sit idle and watch the ANZAC fleet go down.
If the Russians are not at war with the Japanese, Russian territory in the Pacific is considered neutral territory for the Allies–so no attack possible, since the Allied forces cannot get there.
This is enforced for air units trying to land in Russia Pacific territories.
I have never had it come up, but not sure if the TripleA engine enforces the neutrality for a British land unit in let’s say Moscow trying to move to Samara or Novorbirsk (I’m not clear where the land border is between Pacific and European Russia). But regardless the players should enforce the rule.
Correct. Neutral powers do not have “friendly neutrals”. The “friendly” part is for those countries at war. If you are neutral, not at war–no invasion of other countries territory (friendly, enemy or neutral)
I’m on my 3rd play test; each one using a Sea Lion feint and a J-1.
Ignoring the litany of tactical errors I am making… in my second game I did indeed force Japan to build a Navy, but it didn’t matter. It was a great game though- lasted forever. It ended up with Armageddon in the Oil States- the 3rd battle of Megido with Liepzig thrown in to boot. ( The Axis could have won it earlier but wanted to see what would happen f I retreated with Russia all the way to the ME).
For game three, I tried an iterating Tactic in the Pac. I bought 2 planes a round for the US and flew them down to Queensland. ANZAC played possum bough a few men and a fighter and saved some money. Meanwhile hovering with the 16 Russians in Amur. After Japan took the Money islands in J2, I attacked Korea/Manchuria in R3. Japan devastated those Russians in J3, but it pulled enough of their resources to allow ANZAC to build an airbase in Western Australia and have enough stuff their to hold it AND Queensland. Next turn, there will be 5 more fighters in India.
So those Russians delayed India for a turn and in so doing may have secured it for a long while.
The bad news is that Alexandira has been a disaster for the Allies, so it looks like they will lose anyhow. (the Germans are just rolling like gods in the Sea every game- they are 3 for 3 in taking out SZ 101 and 96; Taranto was a disaster for the UK and the Italians took Alex on I3; I’m waiting for R4 for Germany-Russia to start scrapping.- it’s an interesting game)
Anyhow, my point is, it seems if one can get Jpan to ping pong a bit, you can secure Australia and get a strong force in India to boot, just buying fighters and 2 inf (for Hawaii), and timing the R attack with the Air base in W. Australia.
In other words, I’m starting to learn how important the mobility of an Air Force is. I’m still so used to just buying a crap ton of infantry.
@CHILDREN Thanks for designing and sharing these setup charts. I wonder if you have them in a white background. The black background consumes too much of my black ink. Or, would you know other alternative setup charts with a lighter background? Many thanks.
Definitely. I’ve been playing many of the different versions of A&A for a while now and having read through rule book after rule book especially with G40 I still miss rules that I overlooked and what not so thank goodness the forums exist for people to inform on these kinds of overlooked and missed aspects of the game.
While we may see the fight in the Mediterranean from different perspectives, what we inevitably all agree on is that it’s one of the more significant fronts that can easily sway the game for one side or the other all down to the results of a simple raid on Italy.
For me I stick by my philosophy that every Axis piece on the board should be doing something, or playing some sort of role. Which is why I’m a firm believer that scrambling the fighters into the Taranto Raid as the Axis should be done every single time because fact of the matter is, a lot of people tend to say that it’s better to save those fighters for something new but in the end nobody really knows what they’re saving them for, and that’s what causes Axis players to lose. I mean granted Squire had previously said earlier to save those fighters against the French ships or the remaining British ships in the Med but for me the Taranto Raid is the only time I’ll really be able to take of British Planes if I scramble these fighters and when they’re throwing this many planes at me then that’s my objective. Obviously you won’t be able to have absolutely every unit doing something and playing some sort of genuine authentic role but you can get very close to having every single unit active on the board, which is what wins you games.
Right off the bat Germany will be consistently making more money than both Britain and the Soviet Union having taken out the rest of Europe and thats before they start attacking the Soviet Union.
Keeping the income advantage really only rests on America since the only change in their income will be losing the Philippines islands, as for everybody else, they can expect their IPC count to plummet with the combined strength of the Germans and Italians.
Also, like I said, taking Rome and Berlin is on the table to accomplish, taking Tokyo however not so much since A) it’s on an island B) It’s gonna have lot’s of dudes on it and C) the Pacific is too big to build any assortment of floating bridge and would be too expensive, hence why we would end the game if Japan is limited to their home island plus maybe Korea since they’re pretty much dead in the water so there is no point in playing any further.
The factory is destroyed as the territory becomes Chinese no matter what Allied Power captured it.
AA Pacific 1940 2nd Edition Rulebook - Page 10
If a Japanese industrial complex is built on a Chinese territory and that territory is later recaptured by the Chinese or liberated by another Allied power, the industrial complex is removed from the game.
Well for starters I’ve totally negated this rule so thanks for confirming with me that this was true
While I’m not the biggest fan of a rule like this, I can understand how it stops player like Germany and the Soviet Union from abusing the fact that they could just move their tanks forward into combat, than move them out of combat to keep them safe.
Attack a fleet of transports 3 steps away from the carrier and attack a huge fleet in between with 1 sub. Since in theory the sub could win your carrier could pick up that lone fighter so the attack is valid.
Since the sub didnt win your fighter is lost but if you trade it for 2-3 transports.
And its not an illegal move as it was possible to land the plane during the combat move phase.
A bid sub makes the odds 94%. That’s a very rational attack. Even in the worst case, you wipe out the IT fleet and 2 axis fighters. There are no guarantees in life but that attack has really really good odds.
Bring over 2 fighters from UK and the odds are 99%.
If you lose the fighter and bomber to the UK BB, it’s very painful. If that BB survives on top of that, Germany is probably going to lose.
On this line, the old guy could be named: Axis & Allies 2nd Edition (Classic)
or, to cover all: Axis & Allies 1st/2nd/3rd Editions (Classic)
Since you don’t see “Classic” anywhere in the box or the manual or anything for real, it fits better between parenthesis (people that don’t know stuff might think it’s not the one, since the one they have is not called “Classic” anywhere, of course).
I took a look at the opening post. Although I do not agree with all points, it sounds quite solid in general and can function as some good common sense and/or as rule of thumbs for less experienced players.