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


  • '13

    Can the Flying Tiger from China can land in Burma when Japan and the UK Pacific are not at war?



  • If Japan attacks the Britain, Anzac, French Indo China while France is still with its capital, does that affect USA nuetrality



  • American Neutrality and Japan

    If Japan attacks the UK (pacific), ANZAC, or French Indo China, does that bring the US into the war


  • '15 Official Q&A '11 '10 Moderator

    @eddiem4145:

    American Neutrality and Japan

    If Japan attacks the UK (pacific), ANZAC, or French Indo China, does that bring the US into the war

    UK or ANZAC or Dutch, yes.
    FIC, no.  Japan will only lose the 10 IPC NO for taking FIC, but America cannot declare war based only on FIC being taken.


  • TripleA

    Can Russia and Japan declare war on each other without impacting the mongolian thing (as long as they do not attack neighboring spots)?


  • Official Q&A

    @UnknownSoldier:

    Can the Flying Tiger from China can land in Burma when Japan and the UK Pacific are not at war?

    Yes.  “UK Pacific” is not a political entity.  Both China and UK are at war (China with Japan, UK with Germany and Italy), so Chinese units may enter Burma and Kwangtung.  The restriction on UK units entering China while UK and Japan are not at war applies only one way and not the other.

    @Cow:

    Can Russia and Japan declare war on each other without impacting the mongolian thing (as long as they do not attack neighboring spots)?

    Yes.


  • Customizer

    .


  • 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 '12

    Can Japan take French Indo Chine without losing the USA 10+ NO if France declares war first?  The rules says “attack” is the prerequisite to losing the NO.  Seems a little silly that France could declare war on Japan, Japan invades and the US goes into a tizzy about it.

    Answer?  :lol:


  • '15 Official Q&A '11 '10 Moderator

    French declaration is irrelevant.

    The NO says if Japan hasn’t attacked FIC, and says nothing about French/Japanese relations.
    If Japan attacks FIC under any circumstances, she will not be getting this NO the rest of the game, period.


  • '13

    @Krieghund:

    @UnknownSoldier:

    Can the Flying Tiger from China can land in Burma when Japan and the UK Pacific are not at war?

    Yes.  “UK Pacific” is not a political entity.  Both China and UK are at war (China with Japan, UK with Germany and Italy), so Chinese units may enter Burma and Kwangtung.  The restriction on UK units entering China while UK and Japan are not at war applies only one way and not the other.

    @Cow:

    Can Russia and Japan declare war on each other without impacting the mongolian thing (as long as they do not attack neighboring spots)?

    Yes.

    Thanks Krieghund!



  • 1.) Japan attacks UK and ANZAC. Does that bring US into war. Please show where in the rule book it states this.
    2.) Strategic Bombing. Do strategic bombers and tactical bombers get a shot during air to air combat.

    Official Answers Please.

    Eddie Moreno


  • '15 Official Q&A '11 '10 Moderator

    1. Yes.  Page 37, Europe 2nd edition manual, under USA.  If Japan makes an UNPROVOKED attack on UK or ANZAC, the USA can then declare war on any and all Axis powers.  If UK or ANZ attacks or Declares on Japan before Japan attacks, then the USA would have to wait until the end of round 3 to declare, unless one of the three Axis powers attacked the USA or declared on USA directly.

    2. Yes.  Strategic and tactical bombers get to attack on a 1 in air to air combat.  Page 17 of Europe 2nd edition manual.  Bullet point one says attacking bombers and fighters are a part of the battle.  Bullet point three says all air units have attack and defense values of 1.  Krieghund has confirmed that bombers means tactical and strategic, both.
      Of course, strategic and tactical bombers of the defender cannot be used, only fighters can defend.  But attacking tactical and strategic bombers all get to fire on a 1.



  • @Gamerman01:

    1. Yes.  Page 37, Europe 2nd edition manual, under USA.  If Japan makes an UNPROVOKED attack on UK or ANZAC, the USA can then declare war on any and all Axis powers.  If UK or ANZ attacks or Declares on Japan before Japan attacks, then the USA would have to wait until the end of round 3 to declare, unless one of the three Axis powers attacked the USA or declared on USA directly.

    2. Yes.  Strategic and tactical bombers get to attack on a 1 in air to air combat.  Page 17 of Europe 2nd edition manual.  Bullet point one says attacking bombers and fighters are a part of the battle.  Bullet point three says all air units have attack and defense values of 1.  Krieghund has confirmed that bombers means tactical and strategic, both.
      Of course, strategic and tactical bombers of the defender cannot be used, only fighters can defend.  But attacking tactical and strategic bombers all get to fire on a 1.

    Also: the US is not immediately brought into the war by the unprovoked attack on uk/Anzac.  It remains neutral until the US turn when the US can finally declare war.


  • '15 Official Q&A '11 '10 Moderator

    @kcdzim:

    Also: the US is not immediately brought into the war by the unprovoked attack on uk/Anzac.  It remains neutral until the US turn when the US can finally declare war.

    Yes, that’s why I said “the USA can then declare war”.  Declarations of war only happen at the beginning of your own turn.

    War is only immediate when an enemy declares war on you directly.  When conditions are met, you always wait until your turn to declare war, like Russia on Euro-Axis or Japan making an attack on UK or ANZ.

    You say “finally”, but USA goes immediately after Japan.  We’re not playing the original anymore…



  • @Gamerman01:

    You say “finally”, but USA goes immediately after Japan.  We’re not playing the original anymore…

    Well, despite the fact that this may be the .2 FAQ, there is still holdovers and people who read this but play OOB .1 so I just wanted to reiterate that attacking uk/Anzac doesn’t immediately bring them into the war- it merely opens the door on their turn.


  • TripleA

    So airbases and minor ics on china territories… the minor ics go poof right?


  • '12

    Correct.  Also worth noting, China is not allowed to repair damaged air and naval bases.


  • Customizer

    Guys,

    ––I’m marking this thread for reference purposes. Thanks.

    “Tall Paul”


  • '15 Official Q&A '11 '10 Moderator

    @Tall:

    Guys,

    ––I’m marking this thread for reference purposes. Thanks.

    “Tall Paul”

    The dot didn’t do it?  🙂



  • #1. Germany has a submarine, a destroyer, and an empty air craft carrier which is being attacked by 3 british fighters. The attacking British fighters hit once and the defending German surface warships hit once…… can Germany use the sub as a casualty, considering that they have a destroyer present?

    #2. Germany has entered a sea zone containing one enemy submarine with one loaded transport for the purpose of conducting an amphibious assault. Can Germany’s transport ignore the Submarine and land their troops safely into an adjacent hostile territory?

    #3. Japan conducts an amphibious assault on Hawaii with 10 aircraft carriers, 20 carrier based planes, and 10 fully loaded transports, while Hawaii has 1 American Fighter. Japan needs the carriers to legally land all 20 air units which have been assigned to the land battle, so America scrambles it’s single Fighter from their operational air base and sinks up to $500 in Japanese units while landing their fighter safely on land. Is this true or false?


  • Official Q&A

    #1.  No.  UK must have a destroyer in order for its planes to hit subs.

    #2.  If there is at least one German warship in the sea zone at the end of combat movement, yes; otherwise, no.

    #3.  False.  The US fighter will be safe, but the surviving Japanese ships can retreat after one round of combat.  Of course, all of Japan’s planes will be lost, having nowhere to land.



  • @Young:

    #3. Japan conducts an amphibious assault on Hawaii with 10 aircraft carriers, 20 carrier based planes, and 10 fully loaded transports, while Hawaii has 1 American Fighter. Japan needs the carriers to legally land all 20 air units which have been assigned to the land battle, so America scrambles it’s single Fighter from their operational air base and sinks up to $500 in Japanese units while landing their fighter safely on land. Is this true or false?

    @Krieghund:

    #3.  False.  The US fighter will be safe, but the surviving Japanese ships can retreat after one round of combat.  Of course, all of Japan’s planes will be lost, having nowhere to land.

    Krieghund, confused here. I know in retreat all units would retreat to the same space/sz in a direction from which at least one of them came from. (so all the ships would retreat back one space). The 20 air units were involved in a different battle on land (not the same sea battle as the ships). That land battle didn’t happen because the 1 ftr scrambled to the sea, so the air units wouldn’t be retreating would they. If they had movement points left (2 moves), they could reach the carriers couldn’t they.

    Of course the moral of the story is to cover the scramble ability of your enemy, especially when you are in a position to over kill.


  • Official Q&A

    @WILD:

    If they had movement points left (2 moves), they could reach the carriers couldn’t they.

    Yes, they could.  However, from the wording of the original question (“Japan needs the carriers to legally land all 20 air units”), I assumed that they had only one movement point left.  Perhaps that was an invalid assumption, as it was not stated that they needed to be in that particular sea zone.



  • Ok cool, thought I missed something



  • @Krieghund:

    @WILD:

    If they had movement points left (2 moves), they could reach the carriers couldn’t they.

    Yes, they could.  However, from the wording of the original question (“Japan needs the carriers to legally land all 20 air units”), I assumed that they had only one movement point left.  Perhaps that was an invalid assumption, as it was not stated that they needed to be in that particular sea zone.

    So there can be a retreat even if the attacker stated that it would be an amphibious assault? I thought retreats were not allowed during amphibious assaults.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 18
  • 41
  • 7
  • 24
  • 15
  • 2
  • 41
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

86
Online

14.2k
Users

34.5k
Topics

1.4m
Posts