Official Answers

@the-captain

Find here the links to the latest rulebook prints:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/18546/global-1940-2-rules-available-for-download/1

@the-captain said in Looking for Affirmation:

At page 9 in the Axis & Allies Pacific 1940 2E I cannot find any rules indicating that USA collects 30 IPC when attacked by Japan.

This change was introduced in the FAQ and included in later print runs.

@indignation said in Looking for Affirmation:

Greetings,

Correct me if I’m wrong but on page 9 of Global Pacific 2nd edition rules, it states that " An unprovoked declaration of war by Japan on the allies, United States receives a one time payment of 30 IPC". Does this mean that if Japan does so on round 2, the U.S. would receive 30 ipcs immediately which they could use to purchase units, on their turn, round 2, and then after their turn they would subsequently receive an additional 30IPC as part of their national objectives? Also if the U.S. declares war, round 3 they would not receive this one time bonus?

This is correct, but only for the stand-alone Pacific game. This one-time payment does not occur in the Global game (see page 37 for USA Global rules.

@bigfatal
They liberate it for UK.

At the beginning of the 1942 game the Solomon Islands are controlled by Japan, but the original controller is UK.

Thanks, @panther!

@indignation said in Pacific question for Krieghund!:

We’re playing Pacific 1940 second edition, when a declaration of war is declared by either side, when does this occur before combat moves or after combat moves? The reason why I am asking is There is a U.K. destroyer in sea zone 37 and if Japan declares war on round 3 does it have to go into battle with that destroyer in 37 or can it make its combat move ignoring it and then declare war once it’s in season zone 39 on India?

See page 11 of the Rulebook, the “Declaring War”-box:
“War must be declared on your turn at the beginning of the Combat Move phase, before any combat movements are made, unless otherwise specified in the political rules.
An actual attack is not required. Once a state of war is entered into, all territories and sea zones controlled by or containing units belonging to the power or powers on which you declared war instantly become hostile to your units, and the normal restrictions of moving into or through hostile spaces apply, with one exception. During your Combat Move phase in which you entered into a state of war, your transports that are already in sea zones that have just become hostile may be loaded in those sea zones (but not in other hostile sea zones). In effect, transports may be loaded in their initial sea zones for amphibious assaults before war is declared, while the sea zone is still friendly.”

In your sceanrio the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Seazones”-rules (page 13) apply.

@indignation said

2nd question, if 2 countries are currently not at war and occupy the same sea zone ,( Example: Japan and U.K.) then next round Japan declares war, does that sea zone become hostile forcing them to go into battle, or can they ignore the opposing force and move their units away without going in the battle, or just leave a few war ships in that sea zone to address the enemy unit?

According to what was stated above if Japan declares war on UK the seazone becomes immediately hostile. The options again are listed in the “Sea Units Starting in Hostile Seazones”-rules. You may for example stay to conduct combat or leave to avoid combat. Or both.
Also the above stated exception might apply.

@indignation said

3rd question, Can the United States, when not at war, use a friendly powers naval or air base to extend its moves?

No. Rulebook page 14 - Powers not at War… -box:

“The United States: The United States begins the game neutral, and as such
isn’t initially part of the Allies. Being at war with no one and having a strict isolationist
policy, the United States has especially tight restrictions. It may not move land
or air units into neutral territories. It may not move units into territories or onto
ships belonging to another power or use another power’s naval bases, nor may
another power move land or air units into its territories or onto its ships or use
its naval bases. In addition, the United States may not end the movement of its
sea units in sea zones that are adjacent to Japanese-controlled territories.”

This topic
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/3061/marti-issues
indicates that a developper has it on the list.

But it doesn’t look like someone will look into it anytime soon.

@andrewaagamer

This topic
https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/3061/marti-issues
indicates that a developper has it on the list.

But it doesn’t look like someone will look into it anytime soon.

@andrewaagamer

Issues like this one might be resolved by a browser refresh.
Next step would be to clear the browser cache.

Logging off before and logging in after that should help.

@surfer said in Carrier escape from kamikazi:

@krieghund Now I’m confused. How is this different from the transport rule we discussed earlier
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/18412/global-2nd-edition-q-a-aag40-2/2864

It is different because in that case the transports were moving to escape a battle. In this case, there is no battle to escape.

@surfer said in Carrier escape from kamikazi:

BTW, how is the scramble any different than kamikazi? Neither are in play at the time of combat movement. There is no combat in either case–only the defender’s option to combat.
I would think if you could avoid combat from scramble, then you should be able to avoid combat from kamikazi.

A scramble forces a sea battle, while a kamikaze strike does not. A kamikaze strike is a single attack against a single unit, not a full-blown battle.