• Official Q&A

    @boldfresh:

    if i have a US fleet with transports in z62 and US infantry in Bry - Can i engage in a fleet battle with a destroyer placed by japan in z62 and then IN THE NON-COMBAT MOVE load my infantry onto transports that never moved from z62 in the combat move?  i know that if i do load them IN NONCOMBAT, I cannot move them from z62 but I’m not 100% sure if the transports can remain in z62 during combat and then be loaded in noncombat.

    They cannot be loaded in noncombat movement, as they have participated in combat.

    @boldfresh:

    Alternative question, not wanting to do it in this situation but wondering if it’s possible.  If I would move a transport from z62 to z63 in the combat move, could I then load units to the transport in the noNON-COMBAT phase?

    No.

  • '12

    thanks Krieg


  • Question about the rule of produced cv that can take existing fighters with them.

    Let assume that the US have a (big enough) fleet in sz62 and trannies in sz63. Japan does not have a fleet anymore, but still have 2 fighters in Kiangsu.

    SFE and Buryatia have been liberated by the US.

    If Japan produces a CV, is it possible to attack sz63 with 1 fighter from Kiangsu without attacking sz62 ? Or is it mandatory to send the second fighter against sz62 to have the (theoretical) possibility of destroying the fleet, and therefore enable a safe landing of the fighter in sz62 on the produced cv ?

    I believe option 2 is the good one, but I’m not 100% sure.

  • Official Q&A

    An attack on sea zone 62 is not necessary.  The new carrier will provide a landing spot for the fighter, as the rules only require that there be a friendly carrier in the sea zone, not that the sea zone be friendly.


  • ok, I see. Another trick to know 🙂

    Thanks for the answer 🙂

  • 2022 '15 '11 '10 Official Q&A Moderator

    @Yoshi:

    ok, I see. Another trick to know 🙂

    Thanks for the answer 🙂

    If knowing the rules OOB is a trick…  🙂

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    @gamerman01:

    @Yoshi:

    ok, I see. Another trick to know 🙂

    Thanks for the answer 🙂

    If knowing the rules OOB is a trick…  🙂

    The trick is how to make the rules work for you. ^_~


  • exactly 🙂

  • TripleA '12

    I apologise if this has been raised before but it occured to me just now:

    My gaming group use the optional rule of ‘Fighter Escorts’ during SBR, as we prefer it. I am also aware that defending AA Guns now fire once at each Fighter, and then once at each Bomber. Now, I find that the two rules don’t work particularly well together because I would have thought that players would use their Fighter escorts to protect the Bombers from the AA Gun fire (i.e. the Fighters would be selected as casualties instead of the Bombers, if you so wished).

    If I have got this right, then the only reason you would bring Fighter escorts is to protect the Bombers from defending Fighter fire… is this right? I would be grateful if somebody could explain/clarify.

    Thank you  🙂

  • 2022 '15 '11 '10 Official Q&A Moderator

    @Lozmoid:

    I apologise if this has been raised before but it occured to me just now:

    My gaming group use the optional rule of ‘Fighter Escorts’ during SBR, as we prefer it. I am also aware that defending AA Guns now fire once at each Fighter, and then once at each Bomber. Now, I find that the two rules don’t work particularly well together because I would have thought that players would use their Fighter escorts to protect the Bombers from the AA Gun fire (i.e. the Fighters would be selected as casualties instead of the Bombers, if you so wished).

    If I have got this right, then the only reason you would bring Fighter escorts is to protect the Bombers from defending Fighter fire… is this right? I would be grateful if somebody could explain/clarify.

    Thank you  🙂

    You’re reading it right.  The escorts only protect the bombers from interceptors.  In 1940 games, escorts are not subject to AA fire.  I played several games of AA50 with escorts/interceptors, house-ruling that escorts are NOT subject to AA fire.  If you don’t, you’re pretty much making factories with AA guns and interceptors impervious to SBR’s, as you have yourself deduced.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I have to agree, the optional rule for escorts seems ridiculous to use in reality.  In theory, like communism, it works great, but like communism, it fails when implemented.  Why send fighters to get shot at by AA Guns?

    Already the average dmg done by a bomber is 3.5 and at an average loss of 1 bomber every 6 runs it costs you 2 IPC for a net gain of 1.5 IPC.  If you add in one escort fighter each run, the change becomes 1 aircraft lost every 3 rounds, since it could be a fighter or a bomber, figure 11 IPCs lost every 3 rounds or 3.67 IPC lost a round, for a net loss of 0.67 IPC a round.  So why go SBR at all?  (This, of course, assumes you send 1 escort and not, say, 6 escorts or something.)

    The fix in AA40 seems plausible, at this time, allowing you to escort bombers to get past any defending aircraft and then have the bombers face AA gun fire.  At least then you have a chance of killing a 10 IPC fighter for each 10 IPC fighter you might lose and still getting 3.5IPC in damage for every 2.5IPC you lose to AA Fire.

  • TripleA '12

    Thanks very much, both of you. I don’t have the AA40 games yet and so I wasn’t aware of the fact that Fighters escorting Bombers were no longer subject to AA Gun fire. That’s a great rule and I will house-rule it from now on. Cheers!  🙂

  • '10

    @Lozmoid:

    Thanks very much, both of you. I don’t have the AA40 games yet and so I wasn’t aware of the fact that Fighters escorting Bombers were no longer subject to AA Gun fire. That’s a great rule and I will house-rule it from now on. Cheers!  🙂

    The rule change probably stems from the fact that the interceptors would engage the escort /bomber before the actual target hence no AA activity. Escorts would have to drop tanks to engage the interceptors forcing their premature return only leaving surviving bombers to face flak when they reach their target.

  • 2022 '15 '11 '10 Official Q&A Moderator

    @Lozmoid:

    Thanks very much, both of you. I don’t have the AA40 games yet and so I wasn’t aware of the fact that Fighters escorting Bombers were no longer subject to AA Gun fire. That’s a great rule and I will house-rule it from now on. Cheers!  🙂

    Any time.

  • TripleA '12

    Hi, I would like to know if you can move your sea units out of a hostile sea zone and into another hostile sea zone during your combat move. On page 13 of the AA50 manual it says:

    Units cannot end their move in friendly spaces during the Combat Move phase except in four instances:

    • Sea units moving from a hostile sea zone to escape combat as their move

    I am already aware that I can move my sea units out of a hostile space in order to escape combat; but is this on the proviso that those units do not take part in any combat? In other words, it’s basically a Non Combat move that happens before the Conduct Combat phase?

    I would like to know whether I can move my sea units out of the hostile sea zone in question, and into another sea zone - or even back into the same one - to engage enemy sea units. I know that enemy sea units block my sea units’ movement (except for the Submarine) but if they let me out, will they let me back in again?

    If all this sounds a bit foolish, let me explain with an example: my Destroyer is in the same sea zone as an enemy Destroyer. It is my Combat Move phase. There is an enemy convoy zone (of the old AA Europe variety) one space away. I want to move my Destroyer into the convoy zone, disrupt it, and then move back into the space with the enemy Destroyer, to engage it. Kind of like a water blitz. Is this allowed?

    Or would I be allowed to leave the hostile space with the enemy Destroyer, disrupt the convoy zone (a combat move for sure) and then move once more to a different hostile zone to engage another enemy warship?

    Or… would I be ok to leave the hostile space with the enemy Destroyer, disrupt the convoy zone and then move once more to a friendly sea zone? I doubt I can do this, as I have made a hostile maneouvre - but I have not ended up in a hostile space! So, would this be allowed?

    Can you see where I’m coming from? I’d be grateful for any responses, thank you!  🙂

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    My humble opinion, based on previous incarnations of the game, is that you may move out of combat into combat since you did not end your turn in a friendly sea zone.

  • Official Q&A

    Yes, it’s allowed.  You must be playing with house rules if you have convoy zones.

  • 2022 '15 '11 '10 Official Q&A Moderator

    @Cmdr:

    My humble opinion, based on previous incarnations of the game, is that you may move out of combat into combat since you did not end your turn in a friendly sea zone.

    You must move out during the combat move to avoid combat, and you do not have to be moving into combat (see a recent move I made with USA vs. you in moving subs out of Z62 to avoid combat with your destroyers)  🙂  Technically, I HAD to move them out in combat move, or else I would be attacking your fleet.  (I couldn’t wait until noncom)

  • '10

    hey folks, I’m sure this has already been covered somewhere, but can any ship enter into BLA, or is it closed off?

  • 2022 '15 '11 '10 Official Q&A Moderator

    @RisingDragon:

    hey folks, I’m sure this has already been covered somewhere, but can any ship enter into BLA, or is it closed off?

    The Black Sea?  By default, Zone 16 is open to all ships, but there is an official optional rule you can agree to play by, that Zone 16 is closed to all ships entering or leaving.  Theoretically, you could build ships into Zone 16, but they could never leave (if you were playing with the Dardanalles strait closed).

    The league on this site plays with the Black Sea open.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    The league on this site plays with black sea (SZ 16) open if, and only if, both sides do not agree to close it.

    Also, there’s an “unofficial” house rule I’ve come across, and like, that SZ 16 is closed to any side that does not own Bulgaria, Ukraine and Caucasus (since no one can own Turkey.)  Relieves pressure on Russia early in the game, but also allows the Axis to reinforce Caucasus by sea later in the game.

  • 2022 '15 '11 '10 Official Q&A Moderator

    @Cmdr:

    The league on this site plays with black sea (SZ 16) open if, and only if, both sides do not agree to close it.

    That wasn’t what I was told.  I love playing with the Black Sea closed, but was told that was not an option in league.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    @gamerman01:

    @Cmdr:

    The league on this site plays with black sea (SZ 16) open if, and only if, both sides do not agree to close it.

    That wasn’t what I was told.  I love playing with the Black Sea closed, but was told that was not an option in league.

    Think of it as part of the bid.  Been doin that a lot this year in league.

    “I bid 1 Infantry in England, Closed Dardenelles.”

  • '12

    transporting mechanics question in both combat and noncombat.

    Pg 31 - During an amphibious assault, a transport must either offload all units that were loaded during the Combat Move phase or retreat during sea combat. It may also offload any number of units owned by the transport’s power that already were on board at the start of the turn.

    This came up in a league game between Botider and myself just recently.  I picked up two infantry from ECA in z1 and during the combat move unloaded one infantry to an empty NWE.  Botider brought to my attention that this rule prohibits that action.

    However it raises further questions:

    one more pertinent rules phrase first:  “On NONCOMBAT move a transport can load from two different territories, unload only into a single friendly territory, or voluntarily choose to keep cargo aboard.”

    questions:

    1.  can you offload one unit and keep the other aboard when doing this in the noncombat move?

    2. if at the start of the combat move the transport is already loaded with two units, can you offload one in combat and leave the other aboard?

  • Official Q&A

    The answer to both questions is yes.  The key concept is that any land units that load onto a transport in the Combat Move phase must also unload in an amphibious assault in the same turn, unless the transport retreats from the sea battle, in which case they must remain on board.  Units that load in the Noncombat Move phase or that loaded in prior turns are free to either unload or remain on board.  Of course, a transport may not unload one unit in combat and the other in noncombat in the same turn, as unloading ends a transport’s actions for the turn.

Suggested Topics

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

33
Online

16.3k
Users

38.0k
Topics

1.6m
Posts