• @insanehoshi I would think yes, but this is a later game possibility likely and by the later game Uk should have researched ASW/Radar and the sub game should already be less effective / near its end.


  • I just want to confirm that minor powers like Free France, KMT and CCP can not upgrade their militia to infantry?


  • @insanehoshi Oh! I did upgrade militia to infantry with Free France. I see that I needed to have a Supply Path from a Factory in the Home Country to the land zone the unit receiving the upgrade is in. So I bollixed that up!

    You are right about KMT and CCP as minors being unable to upgrade militia, but it’s conceivable Free France could upgrade, if they took a territory adjacent to Paris, built a factory on it, then could trace a Supply Path from it to the unit being upgraded.

    : )


  • @insanehoshi
    Correct . As Gw enthusiast stated you need a factory in home country and supply path.


  • This post is deleted!

  • Can you retreat from a combat where you have wiped all opposing units?

    In 9.4 it says you can retreat at the end of any combat round in lieu of the next rounds attacks, it makes no mention of having to require opposing units still present.

    Also if you cant, what about the case where a submarine submerges, can you retreat from that?


  • @insanehoshi I would assume not, as both end the combat, and come before you would retreat. That said, that is out of my head, I’ll check the rulebook and get back to you.


  • If you eliminated all defenders, there cannot be any further rounds of attack. Your retreat is not “in lieu of” another round.

    I do see that the Rule 9.4 says “any combat round”. In table 9-2 it is at step 7.

    As they stand, the rules do not prevent a retreat from an empty territory, but this feels wrong.


  • @insanehoshi i’m gonna say at the point the last unit is defeated combat is over and there is no chance to retreat. that is how i will play it guaranteed. - - There is nothing to retreat from!


  • How many moves does it take to fly over a canal (assuming that you are diplomatically allowed to). Rereading the rules it appears to me that a Canal is part of a land zone naval units can use to move directly from one SZ to the other. Would this mean that to fly over the canal you must move one onto the land zone, and then onto the exiting sea zone?


  • @insanehoshi A canal is in a land zone, so you would have to count it for the fighter.
    Considering the you cannot fly over neutral land zones, and you cannot fly over a neutral canal, I assume this infers you need to spend the movement point.
    Not a rule I particularly like, but that is the RAW.

  • 2022 2021 '16 '15

    In the USA National Reference Sheet the Available Actions from 35IPP says that: “May move ship, build facillities and reinforce Pacific Island”
    Does that mean that the USA is not allowed to upgrade their factorys in the homeland territory before they reach the threshold of 35IPP?


  • @robson All of this is in the FAQ I believe.

  • '20 '16

    @robson Per the FAQ:
    Q: Is the USA able to upgrade its existing facilities before reaching 35 IPP income?

    A: Yes


  • Thanks in advance for any help y’all can provide!

    I have a question about MAP and scrambling aircraft defenders. This issue came up during a current game so I will lay out the scenario:

    UK performs a MAP attack with a carrier-based fighter from the English Channel alongside a paired destroyer to SZ11 off of Western Germany (forgive me if I incorrectly label seazones, I am not near the board at this moment) to attack two German subs.

    The question is, can Germany scramble aircraft from Western Germany into this seazone to help defend the subs?

    Follow-up question: Everything above is the same, except UK sends in multiple other surface warships into SZ11. They cannot participate in the MAP+destroyer attack on the two submarines. If Germany is able to scramble fighters into the seazone, must those scramblers also defend against these additional UK ships although they are prohibited from joining the attack against the German subs?


  • @plasticknight So long as an airbase is in a landzone that is adjacent to that sea zone I don’t see any reason why the Germans would be prevented from scrambling.

    Your second example seems to be a little more tricky but you just have to break down the situation. Once all combat movement is completed the defending player then determines if they want to scramble and participate in whichever combat action: MAP defense or attack the surface ships. If the subs can survive the MAP attack then they would remain in that sea zone. Should the defending player attack the ‘cruisers’ that entered that sea zone then the defending planes would have no impact on the MAP attack/defense. Just my thinking…


  • @plasticknight It is my understanding that with your first scenario, the German player could scramble the fighters to support the submarines. The restriction on the MAP+DD pairing is limiting to the attacking player in this scenario, not the defending player.

    My take on how the situation would work with your second question is:

    1. The attacking player moves multiple attacking ships moving into SZ11. Following Page 37, “Clarifying Ordering Effect”, the attacking player announces his intention.
    2. The defending player announces what he wants to do with his submarines - intercept the moving units, or allow them to continue moving. Let’s say the defending player does not intercept.
    3. The attacking player completes all combat movements.
    4. The defending player now gets to decide if he wants to scramble fighters from Western Germany. Let’s say he does so.
    5. The attacking player rolls for all his units, but tracks separately if his MAP and DD get hits.
    6. The defending player will select his casualties. If he wants, he can pick submarines to be killed by non-MAP+DD pair, but if he doesn’t want that, he would take all the non-MAP+DD pair hits on fighters, then take any left over MAP+DD pair hits on the submarines.
    7. At this point, the defending player can decide if he wants his submarines to submerge, or roll. He can even decide that if he wants a submarine that is going to die shoot back before dying.

  • Thanks for the replies!

    @vondox In line with your thinking (perhaps), I do not feel UK’s additional ships can roll against the scrambling fighters as they are not technically making a combat move, correct? They are only accompanying the MAP fighter+DD in their battle against the two subs. And I believe the rules only allow scrambling against enemy forces performing combat in an adjacent SZ or landzone.

    But… then my response as the UK player would be to state the accompanying surface fleet is blockading West Germany’s naval facilities in SZ11, which technically is a combat action, yes?

    If so, then would those two combat actions (blockading port and MAP+DD attack against subs) be considered separate and thereby allow the scrambling aircraft to decide in which battle to defend? Instead of being forced to defend both?

    @HBG-GW-Enthusiast So you suggest that German scramblers would have to defend against the entire UK force? I can see this as well but with a little more faith as the UK ships (besides the pairing DD) are not participating in the battle German fighters are defending against.

    For what it’s worth, I am playing this game solo (the game is new to me and I have no one willing to play haha) so either way I won’t be too upset!


  • My thinking here is that as Germany I would like to position my subs by themselves in SZ11 and use the airbase to provide cover against MAP attacks. But if the UK can place the entire Home Fleet into SZ11 alongside the MAP attack and use the fleet to attack scramblers, then scrambling is an unwise choice.


  • @plasticknight Yes. In the second scenario, if the Home Fleet moves into Sea Zone 11, then the German player will cower and not scramble any fighters because the Home Fleet would annihilate them. So then, the MAP+DD pair would get their single rolls to hit any German subs. If they got a hit, the hit submarine could fire back, attempting to kill the Destroyer. If they missed, the submarines would submerge.


  • @hbg-gw-enthusiast Thank you for taking the time to reply, I will go with this answer even though I’m still scratching my head a little on the role those UK surface ships are playing in the MAP battle. I have found submarine warfare/MAP/convoy raiding to be both among the most nuanced and interesting aspects of the game. I’ve lurked this forum on numerous occasions to clarify the exact rules in a situation and expect I will do so many times in the future! 😂


  • @plasticknight

    I’m still scratching my head a little on the role those UK surface ships are playing in the MAP battle

    Think of it this way, there isnt a MAP battle and a normal battle that occurs in the zone; There is one single battle where 2 units (MAP and Destroyer) can hit submarines, and all other units that attack normally.


  • @insanehoshi Thank you, that definitely simplifies the scenario. But - at the risk of coming across extremely pedantic - in this case what are those other units actually attacking besides what’s for all purposes an empty SZ since they cannot engage those subs? Can ships attack what is effectively an empty SZ?

    If the UK says the combat action those ships are performing is a naval blockade, the rules prohibit scrambling aircraft from participating in more than one battle, if I understand correctly (at least, they can’t both scramble and defend their originating landzone). So in this case they could seemingly choose to scramble either against the MAP attack or the naval blockade, but not both?

    Forgive me I may be completely off the mark on some or all of this!

    And my apologies guys if I come across argumentative, just mentally torn on what the rules allow here. Plus it feels extra frustrating in a solo game to position my German subs forward just to find out on my UK turn that I’ve likely only fed those subs to the lion! LOL


  • @plasticknight

    in this case what are those other ships actually attacking besides what’s for all purposes an empty SZ since they cannot engage those subs?

    I assume they are there detering the other aircraft from scrambling.

    Can ships attack what is effectively an empty SZ?

    Yes, because the defender can always decide to not submerge his sub and fight as normal.

    So in this case they could seemingly choose to scramble either against the MAP attack or the naval blockade, but not both?

    A blockade isnt a battle, despite it being a combat move. Plus the aircraft need a defending unit to scramble to which establishing a blockade does not have by definition.

    And my apologies guys if I come across argumentative, just mentally torn on what the rules allow here

    None Needed!

    Any time a sub ends a turn next to a zone with an aircraft, its in danger; thats part of the whole game within a game that is submarine hunting.


  • @insanehoshi Ah, these are all very good points. Especially regarding the need for a defending unit to allow scrambling. Thank you, I’ll take this as a rested case.

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

67
Online

16.1k
Users

37.7k
Topics

1.6m
Posts