• @Flashman:

    I thought the British units moving into Belgium automatically triggered a battle. Evidently this only occurs if there are no Allies already there.

    From Larry’s Austria-Hungary post:

    “The rules clearly state that combat occurs when your units share the same space with units belonging to one or more opposing powers and you decide to commit your units to an attack. That’s all fine and good… What this is saying is that you have a choice of attacking or not attacking. In this case, the attack on Serbia, you have no choice. You are required to attack when moving units into territories that have become contested this turn due to your movement of units into them.”

    I read the above as saying that combat is only required when a territory initially becomes contested, any future movement of units (whether your own or your ally’s) does not automatically trigger combat.

    @Flashman:

    So, if Britain had wanted to attack the German in Belgium, would this have constituted an amphibious assault, even though there are French units there contesting the area?

    From Larry’s British Empire First Turn Report:

    “When you think about it, this artillery unit will actually fire twice during the same battle, once during the pre-emptive strike, and again during the land battle. Just one more comment on pre-emptive strikes… These strikes are not made against reinforcing units that are being offloaded by ship into a contested territory. For example, if Germany had an artillery unit in Belgium it could not make a pre-emptive strike against those British forces that are landing there this turn. Hope I’m not getting too technical here.”


  • The new artillery rule is very exiting :-)

    Its very similar to the Blockhouse rule from A&A D-day where the blockhouses fired a pre-emptive strike against the amphibious assaulting land units. Me like. This rule could be used in the other A&A editons too, maybe as a house rule ?

  • Customizer

    Has anyone picked up on repairing BBs yet?

    Can they repair anywhere, in any friendly Naval Base, or in just home NBs?

    How much does it cost?

    Still no word on how Portuguese/Belgian/Spanish colonies work.

    Is there a Naval Battle Board?

    From The British report, LH states:

    “… ships can only be built in SZs that are adjacent to controlled tts that have a naval base”.

    Does this then include captured NBs, or should Larry have specified original home NBs?

    If the former, does the control of mines change with ownership of the tt?

    Elsewhere in the report, Larry states that

    “if a SZ has enemy subs or transports the invader can choose to ignore them and go straight to the land combat”.

    Does that mean that subs cannot contest an amphibious assault, even if the transports concerned have no escort ships?

    I assume planes cannot take part in naval combat as there is no provision for them to move to a land tt afterwards; so no Kamikazes in this game…


  • Going back to wove100’s post about the British moving into Belgium (which is contested having both French and German units in it). I believe that because the territory is already contested, when the UK moves units into Belgium one of two things could happen.

    1. The Brits move in to reinforce the French position (as Larry did), and there isn’t a battle.

    2. The Brits make an attack on the German units that are there. If that is the case then the German artillery would get its pre-empt shot.

    Is that how you see it  wove100 ?

  • Customizer

    Yes, but only the Brits could be taken as casualties.


  • @Flashman:

    Yes, but only the Brits could be taken as casualties.

    Right because friends don’t attack together, only def together.

  • Customizer

    Yes, but only invaders from the sea are subject to PES; even UK units already there would be immune.

  • Customizer

    We don’t know the complete Commonwealth rules yet, but I’m already thinking of house ruling that:

    Only infantry can be placed in Bombay, no Commonwealth country had a significant aircraft building industry, certainly not India.

    Limit the build to 3 IPCs per turn, i.e. 1 infantry

    However, the limit can be saved for 2 turns to build a transport, placed in SZ 29, representing Australian ship building capacity.

    I’m also thinking the same rules should apply to Canada, which I’m guessing has an income of 2; again this capacity can be pooled over several turns to produce:

    2 turns 4 IPC = infantry or artillery
    3 turns 6 IPC = transport, sub or 2 infantry

    You may ask why would the UK want to build units in Canada rather than London; well its a shorter route to the Middle East for one thing; also Canadian transports could help ship Doughboys over the water (about half American troops sent to Europe in the war were carried by RN ships).

    Although did I read somewhere that ships aren’t allowed to carry allied units in this version?


  • @WILD:

    Going back to wove100’s post about the British moving into Belgium (which is contested having both French and German units in it). I believe that because the territory is already contested, when the UK moves units into Belgium one of two things could happen.

    1. The Brits move in to reinforce the French position (as Larry did), and there isn’t a battle.

    2. The Brits make an attack on the German units that are there. If that is the case then the German artillery would get its pre-empt shot.

    Is that how you see it  wove100 ?

    Possibly. Although, since a contested territory implies well entrenched defenses, it may be that even if the British attack, the Germans get no pre-emptive artillery shots. No pre-emptive shots in contested territories could be Larry’s way of simulating that the British units would land at allied controlled ports, move into the front lines, and then launch their attack.

    So, my instinct is that #1 is true whether or not the British attack, but I’ve been oh so wrong before.

    Edit: Since the above sentence makes no sense when I reread it, I’ll be clearer: I think there would be no pre-emptive artillery shots if the British launched an attack in Belgium because Belgium was already contested when the British arrived.


  • The British seem quite powerful. If  most IPCs are spent in India, the Ottoman Empire will be unable to cope with the threat, especially if the Russians move as well. With an activation of Arabia and an invasion Persia plus Trans-Jordan, the British manage to create a single three-territory front too strong to be repulsed for many initial rounds. Furthermore, once the few German units in Africa have been destroyed, all remaining on that continent will head towards the English-Ottoman frontline, regardless of nationality. It seems, then, that the OE is Italy of the CPs.

    The way I see it, the French don’t really need a lot more help than what they get from the Americans unless both the French and the Russians are bad. We all know that time is what wins the game for the Allies, so if the (initially) powerful advances of the CPs can be stalled, the game is practically up.

  • Customizer

    The suggested Persian strategy really makes me hope that the Allies are not permitted to invade neutrals.

    The British could then simply march Commonwealth units straight through Persia into Sevastopol and essentially that’s the UK joining Russia on the Eastern Front.

    If the Allies are allowed to invade neutrals, and the UK can place more than the odd piece in India, then we’re heading towards a game that is little more than a production race with no real room for strategy.

    At least if the giant “Sevastopol” tt were divided east/west then the Turks might stand a chance of heading them off in the Caucasus; I suspect this may become a common map amendment.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

41

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts