I’ve created a separate thread for my work on the OOB 1914 map. Please go here to discuss it in more detail.
Axis and Allies 1914 FAQ/Question and Answer Thread
-
It seems a lot easier to keep your marker where it is until the territory is actually taken, and you just subtract it during the collect income phase. Like convoy disruption except there is no dice rolling, you just don’t collect.
Not sure how that would be easier. Say AH takes Venice then Italy contests again. You will soon forget whose income you need to subtract from. Much simpler to adjust when it becomes contested and increase income when a territory is captured. Especially since some territories will remain contested for several turns.
-
It never seemed like a problem, we just rely on the time-honored method of a small dry-erase board and then just counting at the end of your turn.
“Checks board You saved X last turn. You’re up Y from these countries. You’re down Z from these. Maths. Done.”
-
We don’t use to board counters when we play either, we just do the math at the end of each turn on a piece of paper. I know we would miss moving the counter at some point (have to do it for most battles), and would be adding things up at the end of each turn anyway. In this game there is only territories, and IPCs saved (haven’t seen sub warfare in 3 games BTW) so we just tally it up at the end of each players turn. If we did use a counter I think we would go with the G40 counter because it would only take 1 marker for each power meaning less hassle (things getting moved around).
-
Adding at the turns end is the most efficient.
-
Adding at the turns end is the most efficient.
Inevitably I miss something somewhere. Especially since France/Italy/Germany/UK can just claim any odd territory in Africa.
-
Texas, it would be no harder than counting who gets convoy raided in global. You subtract it from whom ever happens to control the territory. That is why we have control markers that represent the current power in control.
-
Texas, it would be no harder than counting who gets convoy raided in global. You subtract it from whom ever happens to control the territory. That is why we have control markers that represent the current power in control.
I am not sure if convoy raiding is a good example. I have games where we have forgotten to do the convoy raids for a good part of the game. Also, control markers wouldn’t work for the minor aligned as I wouldn’t subtract from Russia’s income for a contested Romania. I guess I fail to see the difficulty of adjusting the NPC when a territory becomes contested, then you do a quick look during collect income without having to figure out what to subtract.
-
@Texas:
It seems a lot easier to keep your marker where it is until the territory is actually taken, and you just subtract it during the collect income phase. Like convoy disruption except there is no dice rolling, you just don’t collect.
Not sure how that would be easier. Say AH takes Venice then Italy contests again. You will soon forget whose income you need to subtract from. Much simpler to adjust when it becomes contested and increase income when a territory is captured. Especially since some territories will remain contested for several turns.
Here is what I do for contested territories:
When an army moves in to contest a territory, I immediately place that attacking army’s control marker on the territory upside down. I then also immediately deduct the lost income on the chart to show the contested situation. Much simpler to show the changes.
-
Good idea.
Next edition: have “contested” printed on the reverse of control counters.
-
sorry if this has been covered, but can anyone (other than US before war) move into Spanish Morocco and claim it?
-
Anyone can claim it anytime for a free IPC.
-
Here is what I do for contested territories:
When an army moves in to contest a territory, I immediately place that attacking army’s control marker on the territory upside down. I then also immediately deduct the lost income on the chart to show the contested situation. Much simpler to show the changes.
I believe the rule book (p.15) has you deduct the income immediately also. Remembering to do that will save a lot of time when calculating income. I use orange chips from HBG to identify contested territories. I guess you could also use the grey or red chips from other AA games.
-
Regarding calling off an amphibious assault: can this be done due to the loss of ANY unit involved in the operation; for example a cruiser escorting the transports, or a Battleship intending to bombard; or must the loss include that of a transport carrying the intended invading land units?
-
The former.
-
The rules state that units being loaded onto a transport “must use their entire move to load onto and/or offload from a transport.” A fighter’s move is 2 spaces. Does this indicates that fighters cannot move 1 space into the coastal tt, then use the remaining 1 space of their movement as their “move” onto the transport? Like tanks in the WWII versions?
-
Also can land a plane on a transport if the transport is not on the coast, but still 2 movement spots away?
-
The rules state that units being loaded onto a transport “must use their entire move to load onto and/or offload from a transport.” A fighter’s move is 2 spaces. Does this indicates that fighters cannot move 1 space into the coastal tt, then use the remaining 1 space of their movement as their “move” onto the transport?
They cannot.
Like tanks in the WWII versions?
They can’t, either.
@Quintus:
Also can land a plane on a transport if the transport is not on the coast, but still 2 movement spots away?
No.
-
So when exactly can I “call off” an amphibious assault; say my only escort is sunk by mines, rendering the operation impossible, can the transports stay where they are and not roll for mines. Or, since movement is considered simultaneous, do they still have to roll for mines even though they will not in fact be moving through to the target SZ even if they avoid the mines?
Or do they still have to move through anyway, but just not make the assault, which might be delayed suicide if there are hostile ships where they are moving to?
In other words you can call off the landing, but not the planned movement leading to the landing, even if it involves the transports moving 2 SZs including moving unescorted into a mined and hostile SZ?
-
In other words you can call off the landing, but not the planned movement leading to the landing, even if it involves the transports moving 2 SZs including moving unescorted into a mined and hostile SZ?
That’s correct.
-
In other words you can call off the landing, but not the planned movement leading to the landing, even if it involves the transports moving 2 SZs including moving unescorted into a mined and hostile SZ?
That’s correct.
Attempt it as your own risk. 8-)
Suggested Topics
