• If I’m Germany and attack a Russian held East Russia with just inf and art, would it be legal to move tanks through this newly conquered territory to attack Moscow?

  • Official Q&A

    Welcome, Sweet Daddy!

    Not in the same turn.  All combat movement must be completed before any combat occurs.  The only exception to this rule is land units performing an amphibious assault that is preceded by a sea battle.


  • No.  I think you mean West Russia.  All combat moves happen simultaneously, and you cannot go back to the “Combat Movement” phase after the “Conduct Combat” phase.  In other words, since you cannot attack Russia at the beginning of the Combat Movement phase (at least from WR), then you cannot attack Russia in that round at all. Thus, after Germany’s Combat Movement/Conduct Combat moves in WR, Germany could reinforce WR, and then be at Russia’s doorstep at the beginning of the next round, but could not start a new Combat movement into Russia on the same turn.


  • @LMD:

    No.  I think you mean West Russia.  All combat moves happen simultaneously, and you cannot go back to the “Combat Movement” phase after the “Conduct Combat” phase.  In other words, since you cannot attack Russia at the beginning of the Combat Movement phase (at least from WR), then you cannot attack Russia in that round at all. Thus, after Germany’s Combat Movement/Conduct Combat moves in WR, Germany could reinforce WR, and then be at Russia’s doorstep at the beginning of the next round, but could not start a new Combat movement into Russia on the same turn.

    I did mean West Russia, my bad.

    Thx for clearing that up.

    So to clarify, all combat movement must be done before any combat is carried out?

    If so then the rule makes sense, because the way my group was incorrectly playing was that you moved, conducted that combat, then moved, conducted that combat and so on.

    Thanks in advance for helping me out, as I was the only one in my group who had the attention span to actually read the rules. 🙂


  • I’ve searched high and low for this clarification so I apologize if it’s basic but I don’t understand this aspect of combat movement: If Germany attacks Russia, can Great Britain use their combat move to move units into the attacked area to be used as defense?

    i.e. Eastern Europe move in to attack Karelia. When it’s the GB’s combat move, can they move fighters from UK to Karelia and use them defensively against the attack from Eastern Europe?

  • Official Q&A

    Welcome, Yooper!

    No, it doesn’t work that way.  Germany completes its attack on Karelia (and all of its other attacks) on Germany’s turn.  The battle will be over before UK can move its units on its turn.  UK would’ve had to have moved its units into Karelia on a prior turn in order for them to help defend.


  • Thanks Krieghund! That makes a lot more sense…my son will not be happy tho! Thanks again!


  • Hi everyone!  I just started playing Axis & Allies (AA42) and had a great time completing my first full game.  There were several rule and map questions that came up during our game (who is surprised?) that I am hoping the community can help with.  I noticed others were asking their questions here and I did not find answers to mine.  So here we go.  Thanks in advance!  🙂

    Map Questions:
    A) Does Eastern U.S border SZ 9?
    B) Does Karelia border SZ 5?

    Rule Questions:
    C) Can a UK battleship assist in a US amphibious assault from the same SZ?
    D) Can I build an Industrial Complex in a territory I captured on the same turn?
    E) Can you confirm that AA guns only fire on the first round of combat, and not every round?
    F) Can you confirm that submarines may not hit fighters and bombers?
    G) Can you confirm that fighters and bombers may not hit submarines?
    H) In a sea battle involving an aircraft carrier with fighters (landed on the carrier but now involved in combat, either attacking or defending), may a player choose the aircraft carrier as a casualty before choosing the fighters?
    I) If the answer to H) is “Yes,” then what happens to the surviving fighters with no aircraft carrier to land on?

    “Flavor” Questions:
    J) One player was increasingly annoyed when defending infantry would shoot down planes and bombers.  Am I missing a rule here, or are there any practical or historical explanations of infantry shooting down planes?

    Thanks again  🙂

  • Customizer

    I think the super hero called the war hound is best for these - though as far as “j” is concerned…

    A unit is an ambiguous representation of a military force in WWII.  An infantry unit is mainly comprised of infantry, though not only infantry.  In regard to your friend’s annoyance at infantry shooting down his aircraft… the belligerent infantry may have a couple squads of planes mixed in there, or AA guns.  When they shoot down a plane - we kinda assume that that particular unit also had a strong air support or anti-aircraft element.


  • @Beloved:

    Hi everyone!  I just started playing Axis & Allies (AA42) and had a great time completing my first full game.  There were several rule and map questions that came up during our game (who is surprised?) that I am hoping the community can help with.  I noticed others were asking their questions here and I did not find answers to mine.  So here we go.  Thanks in advance!  🙂

    Map Questions:
    A) Does Eastern U.S border SZ 9?
    B) Does Karelia border SZ 5?

    Rule Questions:
    C) Can a UK battleship assist in a US amphibious assault from the same SZ?
    D) Can I build an Industrial Complex in a territory I captured on the same turn?
    E) Can you confirm that AA guns only fire on the first round of combat, and not every round?
    F) Can you confirm that submarines may not hit fighters and bombers?
    G) Can you confirm that fighters and bombers may not hit submarines?
    H) In a sea battle involving an aircraft carrier with fighters (landed on the carrier but now involved in combat, either attacking or defending), may a player choose the aircraft carrier as a casualty before choosing the fighters?
    I) If the answer to H) is “Yes,” then what happens to the surviving fighters with no aircraft carrier to land on?

    “Flavor” Questions:
    J) One player was increasingly annoyed when defending infantry would shoot down planes and bombers.  Am I missing a rule here, or are there any practical or historical explanations of infantry shooting down planes?

    Thanks again  🙂

    Hey there

    A) No
    B) Yes
    C) No
    D) No
    E) AAs only fire 1 time, before any combat
    F) Subs can’t hit planes
    G) Planes can hit subs, if there’s also a friendly destroyer present in that round of combat (if the destroyer is hit and removed, then they can’t hit subs anymore for the remaining rounds of combat).
    H) Yes, you can always choose the carrier first. However, if the carrier is defending then the planes will always participate on the combat. Only if the carrier is attacking and carrying allied fighters, then they will be considered ‘cargo’ and not participate on combat (but if the carrier is sunk, the planes go to the bottom of the ocean as well).
    I) If the carrier is attacking and they are cargo, then they are lost. If the carrier and the fighters are attacking, the planes have their remaining movement to land on a valid spot. If there isn’t one, they are lost. If the carrier was defending, then the planes have a movement of 1 to a valid landing spot. If there isn’t one, they are lost.
    J) Great philosophical discussion there but basically that’s how the game works. Infantry can destroy planes on the ground and they carry weapons that can shoot at planes.


  • @Mr.Biggg:

    Came up with an interesting scenario happened in a game last night.

    G1 I killed UK battleship. I placed my destroyer and a sub in sea zone 3. Because I wasn’t sure on the semantics of the rules I warned the UK player- “if you try to transport into Norway your transport will auto-die”.

    My reasoning being,

    If I had just brought the destroyer, the UK player would have a chance to kill it with his planes and amphibious assault. If I had only brought the sub, he could ignore it and land. Since I brought both, he engages battles with the destroyer, bringing the sub into the battle. Since the planes can’t hit the subs, the subs get to shoot all day until the transport dies or retreats.

    Was I right in this rule interpretation? Or does the battle end when the destroyer dies? Seems like an odd situation that may not have captured the intent of the rules.

    In a related scenario, what if the planes killed the destroyer, leaving the sub in the sea zone, would a UK aircraft carrier be able to move to that sea zone in the non-combat move in order to land the planes there and ignore the sub?  Or is it still considered hostile territory where a battle took place?


  • I am fairly certain that you can place your aircraft carrier there since the sub doesn’t prevent any kind of movement.  Only surface warships stop that.

  • Official Q&A

    Sgt. Pavlov is right.  The sea zone is no longer hostile.

  • Customizer

    FAQ link on the first page still doesn’t work,

    and the rulebook pdf is still the same ugly, fuzzy, black&white, unreadable low quality scan that was there last time i looked.

    Krieg, can you ask someone at hasbro / avalon-hill to release the official rulebook?

    and if they are to lazy to do so, could someone please do a high quality color scan?  (ie: at least 300 dpi, color, high quality)

    thanks a ton,
    veq

  • Official Q&A

    @Veqryn:

    FAQ link on the first page still doesn’t work,

    The corrected link is a few posts further down, but I went ahead and fixed it in the first post.

    @Veqryn:

    Krieg, can you ask someone at hasbro / avalon-hill to release the official rulebook?

    Why?  It didn’t work the first 50 times.


  • Q. On page 22 it says “in the event that you purchase more units than you can actually mobilize due to production limitations, you must return the over-produced units to the box (your choice on which units), and the cost of the reimbursed units is returned to you.”

    I can see where this happens if I forget the production limit and build, say 10 infantry when my only industrial complex is in a territory with a value of 8?  I understand then I get the 6 IPC cost back and return the 2 infantry into the box.

    Does this mean that I don’t have to mobilize my units if I don’t want to?  Or must I mobilize all of my purchased units that I am able to. I may only hold back units that I can’t mobilize because I don’t have sufficient production capacity like the in the above example.

    I have tried out the GameTableOnline (Official or Uniofficial?) Version [ [u]gametableonline.com/welcome.php ] and this seems to be the case, however, that particular game version does not allow landings on Formosa [[b]Japan] and Iceland [[b]UK] held islands.  Yet, all the other errata seems to have been corrected and understood with regards to other territorial issues.


  • @Crimson_Raptor:

    Q. On page 22 it says “in the event that you purchase more units than you can actually mobilize due to production limitations, you must return the over-produced units to the box (your choice on which units), and the cost of the reimbursed units is returned to you.”

    I can see where this happens if I forget the production limit and build, say 10 infantry when my only industrial complex is in a territory with a value of 8?  I understand then I get the 6 IPC cost back and return the 2 infantry into the box.

    Does this mean that I don’t have to mobilize my units if I don’t want to?  Or must I mobilize all of my purchased units that I am able to. I may only hold back units that I can’t mobilize because I don’t have sufficient production capacity like the in the above example.

    You have to place all the units you bought, if you have enough production capacity for all of them.


  • @Crimson_Raptor:

    “in the event that you purchase more units than you can actually mobilize”

    The only way this would happen is if you’re not paying attention to the game you are playing right?  You couldn’t lose an Industrial Complex on your own turn correct?  It seems like a very odd, or rather common sense, thing to put into the rulebook, right?

  • Official Q&A

    It must be in the rules because there are other alternatives for handling the situation.  The player making the error could simply have been penalized by losing the unplaceable units, or they could have been held in reserve for placement in a later turn.

  • 2022 2021 '20 '19 '18 '17

    I can imagine a situation where a player might exploit this rule. Say that you have 36 IPC on hand and can only place 8 units, then you could buy 7 infantry and 3 tanks, and await the combat results before deciding which units to place.
    Admittedly, this is rather far-fetched and unlikely to occur in practical play.


  • @Krieghund:

    It must be in the rules because there are other alternatives for handling the situation.  The player making the error could simply have been penalized by losing the unplaceable units, or they could have been held in reserve for placement in a later turn.

    That is very true.  For good sportmanship though, it would make sense not to penalize the player for an error like that.  I wouldn’t agree with the purchased units being held in reserve, because the opposing players would see this and could purchase to counter what you have to place accordingly.

    @Herr:

    …imagine… you have 36 IPC on hand and can only place 8 units, then you could buy 7 infantry and 3 tanks, and await the combat results before deciding which units to place…this is …unlikely to occur in practical play.

    Here’s the situation I have been running into:

    Germany has 40 IPC.

    2 Battleships are purchased costing 20 IPC each.

    Combat occurs and 8 Tanks are destroyed.

    Germany now realizes the Battleships are not needed, and so returns them to get the 40 IPC in order to possibly purchase 8 Tanks on its next turn.

    According to the rulebook, this unmobilization of units cannot be allowed because Germany has the ability to place the 2 Battleships, correct?

    I’ve always thought that once you have purchased the units, i.e. a Battleship, the keel has been laid but the ship is not complete.

    After a losing combat, Hitler orders the Battleships to be diassembled and scrapped and the metal is to be shipped back to Germany to be used to used for more Panther Tanks.

    Thus, when you mobilize the units after the Non-Combat Movement phase, the units are now completed (some 3 to 6 months after the keel was laid).

  • 2022 2021 '20 '19 '18 '17

    @Crimson_Raptor:

    Germany has 40 IPC.

    2 Battleships are purchased costing 20 IPC each.

    Combat occurs and 8 Tanks are destroyed.

    Germany now realizes the Battleships are not needed, and so returns them to get the 40 IPC in order to possibly purchase 8 Tanks on its next turn.

    According to the rulebook, this unmobilization of units cannot be allowed because Germany has the ability to place the 2 Battleships, correct?

    Yes, that’s correct - you must place the battleships. You’re right that in reality, it may be possible to reassign some of the materials (though not all of them) to the production of different units, but the rules won’t allow that. Therefore, in the example that I gave, it was financially possible to buy all the units mentioned, but they couldn’t be placed due to production limits, and you can choose which units to place and which ones to return.

    So here’s another totally unlikely scenario abusing the rule:

    • Japan has conquered India, and has two fighters there
    • There’s a US fleet in SZ60, and Japan wants to attack it
    • Japan has 38 IPC and buys 8 infantry and an aircraft carrier
    • Japan attacks SZ60 using the fighters from India
    • If Japan wins in SZ60, it will build the carrier there to land the surviving planes, plus 7 infantry
    • If Japan loses and the planes are destroyed, it will return the carrier and build 8 infantry
      :roll:

    Alright, I’m totally ruining the intent of this thread by dreaming up crazy exploits instead of providing clear explanations. My bad!  😄


  • @Crimson_Raptor:

    @Krieghund:

    It must be in the rules because there are other alternatives for handling the situation.  The player making the error could simply have been penalized by losing the unplaceable units, or they could have been held in reserve for placement in a later turn.

    That is very true.  For good sportmanship though, it would make sense not to penalize the player for an error like that.  I wouldn’t agree with the purchased units being held in reserve, because the opposing players would see this and could purchase to counter what you have to place accordingly.

    @Herr:

    …imagine… you have 36 IPC on hand and can only place 8 units, then you could buy 7 infantry and 3 tanks, and await the combat results before deciding which units to place…this is …unlikely to occur in practical play.

    Here’s the situation I have been running into:

    Germany has 40 IPC.

    2 Battleships are purchased costing 20 IPC each.

    Combat occurs and 8 Tanks are destroyed.

    Germany now realizes the Battleships are not needed, and so returns them to get the 40 IPC in order to possibly purchase 8 Tanks on its next turn.

    According to the rulebook, this unmobilization of units cannot be allowed because Germany has the ability to place the 2 Battleships, correct?

    I’ve always thought that once you have purchased the units, i.e. a Battleship, the keel has been laid but the ship is not complete.

    After a losing combat, Hitler orders the Battleships to be diassembled and scrapped and the metal is to be shipped back to Germany to be used to used for more Panther Tanks.

    Thus, when you mobilize the units after the Non-Combat Movement phase, the units are now completed (some 3 to 6 months after the keel was laid).

    The question is game mechanics and fairness, not real life possibilities.

    When you purchase the units, you don’t know the results of your combat phase (how many units you’ll lose, if you’ll take key territories, etc.).
    If you’re changing your purchases after combat takes place then you’ll have an unfair advantage over your opponent since you’re actually adjusting your buy (even if it is only to receive the IPCs back) to the result of your combat phase.
    It can be argued that a big mistake had been done already with the purchase and that changing the order is a way to minimize the error but you learn how to play better when you suffer the full consequences of such mistakes.


  • @Hobbes:

    It can be argued that a big mistake had been done already with the purchase and that changing the order is a way to minimize the error but you learn how to play better when you suffer the full consequences of such mistakes.

    This is very true, although, I saw the non-mobilization of units to be a severe disadvantage even after absorbing such combat losses as well.

  • '12

    It’s a severe disadvantage only if it was not intended……  It has happened to me that an opponent over built as England, but not somebody who plays the game more than once or twice a year.  He saved his money to purchase an instant fleet and didn’t build land units to go with the transports on a previous turn.  I initially let him get his over build IPCs back, but the strategic disadvantage was huge, so huge I let him retroactively build some land units, but I’m a good sport that way.

    Now had he tried exploit Herr KaLeun laid out with the 8 Inf/CV, I’d probably punch him in the mouth, or at the very least not offer him a refill on his rye and ginger…

Suggested Topics

  • 10
  • 10
  • 35
  • 6
  • 15
  • 9
  • 4
  • 7
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

41
Online

16.2k
Users

37.9k
Topics

1.6m
Posts