I have a couple of things I found in the book that should be cleared up. I haven’t read this entire thread so I apologize if either of these have been answered.
From Page 15 of the rule book:
Regarding Land Units that begin the turn in a contested territory. The last sentence says “If they are moved by transport, they may also remain at sea”. Does this mean that land units in a contested territory can move ONTO transports?
Yes.
From Page 19 of the rule book:
Regarding Attacking tanks ability to absorb hits. The last sentence says “For each tank you have, you remove one die that scored a hit from your side of the battle board.” This is confusing because it sounds like you are removing one of YOUR hits. Your side of the battle board would be the Attacker side.
This should say “For each tank you have, you remove one die that scored a hit from the Defender side of the battle board.”
If you read the “Attacking Units Fire” and “Defending Units Fire” sections again, you’ll see that when you score hits you place the dice that hit on your opponent’s side of the battle board so that he/she will be able to record the hits. As such, you do indeed remove the dice on your side, as they are hits that your opponent scored against you.
Flashman, you could move all those figures to the next space, leaving that infantry behind. However, as soon as you do that one of them must be demoted immediately.
As far as I’m aware.
No. Units may only be “demoted” to infantry during the Mobilize New Units phase, under the conditions stated on page 23 of the Rulebook.
Howdy all. First post here. :)
I’ve combed the rulebook and I cannot find explicit language that explains whether or not, for example, France would get Portugal’s IPCs added to its production if it dropped off an infantry in Portugal, thus mobilizing its allied minor nation. The closest thing I can find is an oddly vague reference that the allies might get Holland’s IPCs, though I’m not sure under what conditions that would or would not occur, as the sentence does not explain that.
Can someone explain to me under what circumstances the IPC value of a minor nation is added to that of a major nation?
Thank you!
Howdy all. First post here. :)
I’ve combed the rulebook and I cannot find explicit language that explains whether or not, for example, France would get Portugal’s IPCs added to its production if it dropped off an infantry in Portugal, thus mobilizing its allied minor nation. The closest thing I can find is an oddly vague reference that the allies might get Holland’s IPCs, though I’m not sure under what conditions that would or would not occur, as the sentence does not explain that.
Can someone explain to me under what circumstances the IPC value of a minor nation is added to that of a major nation?
Thank you!
Portugal is a minor neutral aligned w/France (has a French flag on it). France would collect the IPCs for Portugal every turn that it controls it once it activates it (moves an inf to it). Portugal is worth 2 IPCs so France would also get 2X the IPC value in units to place on it (3 inf+1 art). If Portugal is attacked before France activates it, they would still place the 4 units there to fight the CP. Belgium is also a minor neutral aligned to France, and would work the same way.
BTW if say the UK is the power that activates Portugal (moves units to it for the first time), France still would claim the income for it, and place the units (not UK), but later if the UK liberates Portugal from the CP, then the UK would be the controlling power and collect the income.
Wild Bill is correct. When mobilized, aligned minor neutrals always generate units of the major power they’re aligned with. If mobilized by a friendly power, control goes to the major power they’re aligned with. After that, they’re “up for grabs” and the major aligned power has no further claim on them. The only exception is the rare situation in which all units on both sides are wiped out in a fight, in which case control goes to the aligned major power.
This only applies to captial territories of minor aligned powers. Colonies are controlled by whoever moves into them or captures them, just as minor neutral powers are.
Speaking of minor neutral powers, the reference in the rules regarding Holland refers to the fact that no power has any inherent claim on them. The fact that your units are mobilized there only means something if they happen to be in position to take control at some point.
Were the Russian pieces originally made in a much lighter brown, as I got a couple of fighters in this colour.
Presumably this was changed to avoid a clash with Italian orange.
Flashman, you could move all those figures to the next space, leaving that infantry behind. However, as soon as you do that one of them must be demoted immediately.
As far as I’m aware.
No. Units may only be “demoted” to infantry during the Mobilize New Units phase, under the conditions stated on page 23 of the Rulebook.
Oh. Okay.
Wild Bill is correct. When mobilized, aligned minor neutrals always generate units of the major power they’re aligned with. If mobilized by a friendly power, control goes to the major power they’re aligned with. After that, they’re “up for grabs” and the major aligned power has no further claim on them. The only exception is the rare situation in which all units on both sides are wiped out in a fight, in which case control goes to the aligned major power.
This only applies to captial territories of minor aligned powers. Colonies are controlled by whoever moves into them or captures them, just as minor neutral powers are.
Speaking of minor neutral powers, the reference in the rules regarding Holland refers to the fact that no power has any inherent claim on them. The fact that your units are mobilized there only means something if they happen to be in position to take control at some point.
If I may suggest, then, that in future versions of this game, the impact of Minor Nations on IPC levels be made more clear and explicit. I’m new to A&A with this game so maybe the product was simply not intended for new players, and thus the assumption was made that the player would just know that this is the intent, but it has a great impact on the game and feels important enough for a call-out.
Thanks again for your help, gents.
Oh and happy International Tabletop Gaming Day! Go forth and play some A&A today!
Don’t worry, we’ve all been confused by these rules.
Can income be collected from contested areas? If yes, what if a neutral area is attacked but left contested.
Can income be collected from contested areas? If yes, what if a neutral area is attacked but left contested.
No, contested areas do not generate income.
Offshore bombardment
The units destroyed by offshore bombardment fight back during the one round of combat?
The artillery destroyed by offshore bombardment fight bach in amphibious assault?
The artillery that fight back in a n amphibious assault fight in the round of combat also?
Offshore bombardment
The units destroyed by offshore bombardment fight back during the one round of combat?
The artillery destroyed by offshore bombardment fight bach in amphibious assault?
The artillery that fight back in a n amphibious assault fight in the round of combat also?
Yes, Yes, and Yes.
Are all fighters in a alliance in a single territory used to determine air superiority?
Is air combat to the death?
thanks
Kim
Are all fighters in a alliance in a single territory used to determine air superiority?
Is air combat to the death?
thanks
Kim
Yes, yes, yes!
Are all fighters in a alliance in a single territory used to determine air superiority?
Is air combat to the death?
thanks
Kim
On defense, yes. Offense, no.
Air combat is to the death.
Did we establish that in defence, victory in air combat promotes all defending artillery regardless of the fighter or artillery nationality?
Can you give an alternate/optional initial setup for Russia, especially for infantry? I am not really interested in rehashing the reasons for and against, but I will say that when playing it was too easy for the Central Powers to press into Russia while not being faced with a similar threat from Russia. Six infantry in the frontier territories is far too weak for Russia to have any chance of posing a challenge.
A strong A-H drive into Ukraine puts the CPs on the Russian doorstep far too quickly and thrashes the weak Russian economy too violently. So that is my question… what setup (for Russia) can I use to balance against this, in keeping with some of the game’s original design? This is regardless of playing with the RR rule in effect (or not). It would also keep the preexisting Central Powers setup on the Eastern Front. Thanks!
Can you give an alternate/optional initial setup for Russia, especially for infantry? I am not really interested in rehashing the reasons for and against, but I will say that when playing it was too easy for the Central Powers to press into Russia while not being faced with a similar threat from Russia. Six infantry in the frontier territories is far too weak for Russia to have any chance of posing a challenge.
A strong A-H drive into Ukraine puts the CPs on the Russian doorstep far too quickly and thrashes the weak Russian economy too violently. So that is my question… what setup (for Russia) can I use to balance against this, in keeping with some of the game�s original design? This is regardless of playing with the RR rule in effect (or not). It would also keep the preexisting Central Powers setup on the Eastern Front. Thanks!
Bolstering Russia, even slightly, would likely throw the game out of balance.
Maybe you could take away a starting French unit for each Russian unit you add to balance it.
Is the small space between Egypt and Trans-Jordan controlled by UK or Ottomans? Why isn’t it labeled and does it count for separate movement? ( meaning it takes two land moves to get to TJ.)
