Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

  • '19 '17 '16

    Yes…

  • 2007 AAR League

    I’m practicing against the computer, my question is how come I can’t place a British factory upgrade in South America, Egypt or Ontario?

  • '19

    It has to have a value of 3 and +

  • '20 '16

    @tcnance
    Major industrial complexes can be built only in originally controlled (not captured) territories with an IPC value of 3 or higher.

    A minor industrial complex can be upgraded to a major one at a cost of 20 IPCs. The industrial complex to be upgraded must be located on an originally controlled (not captured) territory that you have controlled since the beginning of your turn and that has an IPC value of 3 or higher.


  • @captainnapalm

    Notably, Manchuria does not count as originally controlled. I have no idea why it doesnt, since you control that territory at the start of the game.


  • @squirecam said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    @captainnapalm

    Notably, Manchuria does not count as originally controlled. I have no idea why it doesnt, since you control that territory at the start of the game.

    That is explanied in the Pacific rulebook, page 8:
    “A few territories in China have a Chinese emblem on them but
    are controlled by Japan at the start of the game. These
    territories are considered to belong to China originally, but
    have been captured by Japan.”


  • @panther

    I know what is in the rule book. But it’s still nonsense. Why are Norway and Romania considered original German territories? Because that makes no sense either…

  • '22 '21

    @squirecam Yep, there’s a lot of Abstract things about the game but it’s such a Great time playing it that we have learned to accept it as is- otherwise it’s just not A&A anymore if it was almost as realistic as the Real War was, you could always use your Own House rules to your personal liking anyway!!!

  • '19 '17 '16

    @squirecam said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    @panther

    I know what is in the rule book. But it’s still nonsense. Why are Norway and Romania considered original German territories? Because that makes no sense either…

    Ok, for further answers to this, if Kiangsu was originally Japanese they could build a major factory on it so that is prohibited. Would also require a long list of exceptions to the non chinese territories that China is allowed to occupy, and also require exceptions to allow China to mobilise there. Far easier to just call it originally Chinese.

    Whereas Norway could be its own power with no capital like the Dutch but that would have no effect on the gameplay except that Germany couldn’t build a major complex but they would never want to. I guess Italy or Japan could retake it from the allies.

  • '19 '17 '16

    Also the Chinese coastal territories could become US/UK/ANZ.


  • @simon33

    These territories should be colored differently then. Have Norway neutral with a German control marker. So the rule is consistent and applied equally.

  • '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 Customizer

    @squirecam said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    @simon33

    These territories should be colored differently then. Have Norway neutral with a German control marker. So the rule is consistent and applied equally.

    Might as well do the rest like Finland,Hungary, Yugo, Romania, Bulgaria, Greece etc etc. pro neutral ? Strict neutral ?


  • @gen-manstein

    Finland got hosed by the Allies during the winter war so I have no issue with them being Pro Axis.

    You could make the argument for the others remaining as is. But Norway was the subject of invasion by both sides.

    So it’s not an original German territory and Germany shouldn’t be able to build a major IC there if we are following the Manchria reasoning.

  • '20

    Romania, Norway, and the Netherlands are not Powers(rule term). China is. That’s the difference.


  • @squirecam check out Sired Bloods map for face 2 face games. He kept all territorys in Sand colors. Maybe this is something for you to Look in.
    He also realigned some territory connections. Very good made. Also i think Young Grashoppers maps are remodelt.

    If you are interested in these let us know and we provide the links or look for the house rule forum or the Customizing forum.


  • @colt45554 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    Romania, Norway, and the Netherlands are not Powers(rule term). China is. That’s the difference.

    I dont see the relevance to being able to build a major factory there or not. Germany never owned Norway. In fact, they conquered it right before the game started.

    Manchuria has a government for years that has favored the Japanese. At least as much as the Romanian government “favored” Germany. Logically, you should be able to build a major ic there.

    If China takes it, burn down the ic.


  • @aequitas-et-veritas said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    @squirecam check out Sired Bloods map for face 2 face games. He kept all territorys in Sand colors. Maybe this is something for you to Look in.
    He also realigned some territory connections. Very good made. Also i think Young Grashoppers maps are remodelt.

    If you are interested in these let us know and we provide the links or look for the house rule forum or the Customizing forum.

    It’s not really the colors but the ic restriction I have an issue with.

    Also the colors on the map make it easier to count up the ipc. But thanks and I’ve seen his map on youtube. People should check it out.

  • '20

    @squirecam said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    @colt45554 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    Romania, Norway, and the Netherlands are not Powers(rule term). China is. That’s the difference.

    I dont see the relevance to being able to build a major factory there or not. Germany never owned Norway. In fact, they conquered it right before the game started.

    Manchuria has a government for years that has favored the Japanese. At least as much as the Romanian government “favored” Germany. Logically, you should be able to build a major ic there.

    If China takes it, burn down the ic.

    “Power” is relevant. Should the player controlling and representing China be totally OK if US captures Shantung/Manchuria instead of liberating it? Would the Chinese people be happy with that? Or does China consider that rightful Chinese land.
    There’s no player representing Norwegian/Romanian/Dutch interests.

    If your question is why must the territory be originally controlled by your Power to make a major factory, it’s because US can make 10 tanks per turn in Norway without it.

    So, Manchuria is originally Chinese because an Ally can liberate, but not capture it and that makes sense. Why can’t Japan build the major there anyway? because of game fairness shown in norway factory example, rule states it must be originally yours.

  • '22 '21

    @colt45554 Very well put, never had that aspect explained any Better!!!👏


  • @colt45554 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    @squirecam said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    @colt45554 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

    Romania, Norway, and the Netherlands are not Powers(rule term). China is. That’s the difference.

    I dont see the relevance to being able to build a major factory there or not. Germany never owned Norway. In fact, they conquered it right before the game started.

    Manchuria has a government for years that has favored the Japanese. At least as much as the Romanian government “favored” Germany. Logically, you should be able to build a major ic there.

    If China takes it, burn down the ic.

    “Power” is relevant. Should the player controlling and representing China be totally OK if US captures Shantung/Manchuria instead of liberating it? Would the Chinese people be happy with that? Or does China consider that rightful Chinese land.
    There’s no player representing Norwegian/Romanian/Dutch interests.

    If your question is why must the territory be originally controlled by your Power to make a major factory, it’s because US can make 10 tanks per turn in Norway without it.

    So, Manchuria is originally Chinese because an Ally can liberate, but not capture it and that makes sense. Why can’t Japan build the major there anyway? because of game fairness shown in norway factory example, rule states it must be originally yours.

    So like I’ve said, the rule should be that germany cant build a major IC in Norway or Romania.

    But as long as they can, I find it problematic with the manchuria rule.

    Do you think the manchuria major ic is game breaking? What about Korea?

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 3
  • 41
  • 202
  • 18
  • 14
  • 3
  • 16
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

24

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts