I have uploaded the FAQs for all of the OOP games (Classic, Europe, Pacific, Revised, D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, Guadalcanal, 1942 1st Edition) in their appropriate forums. Could someone please “sticky” them?

@the_good_captain You may withdraw some or all of them. If a group withdraws together, they must all withdraw to the same sea zone.

@The-Lone-Wolf Western Canada should have a Canadian emblem. It’s in the FAQ, also available at Panther’s link above.

There must be a certain amount of historical accuracy in order for the game to “feel like” the subject matter. Axis & Allies has always dealt with this accuracy at a macro level, striving for “feel” rather than simulation, and thus not dwelling on minutiae. It’s a fine line to walk, but some historical realities must be observed in order to maintain the ambiance. In this case, the restriction presents the feeling of threat without overly burdening the Japan player, as forcing avoidance of all USA territories would.

I won’t pretend that there aren’t game play reasons why this restriction is in place. If there weren’t, why burden the game with it? However, any such rule must be grounded in historical events and realities in order to not come off as “gamey” and ruin the feel of the experience.

All of that being said, the USA did rather famously (infamously?) allow the IJN to get within striking distance of Hawaii, as well as several other of its Pacific possessions, without raising much of a fuss until it was too late. I doubt the same would have been true if the mainland had been so threatened (my original post did make this distinction). In game terms, the “threat zone” of the mainland extends two sea zones out. Since the Hawaiian sea zone is outside of that radius, and since Hawaii could just as easily be attacked from Japanese-held territory (Marshall Islands), there was little point in game terms of excluding Japan from that sea zone.

@chaikov Yes, you’re interpreting the rules correctly.

However, WWII submarines didn’t “block” convoys. They attacked them, causing significant losses, but not stopping them altogether. Submarines were given the ability to pass through enemy units (countered by destroyers) in order to give them better survivability so they could live to attack on their own turn. This works both ways so that players can’t flood the board with cheap blockers and slow down game play.

I hope this helps.

The site is down for maintenance. I have no word yet on how much longer this will take, but it will return.

@the_good_captain You have it right.

Unfortunately, it’s very common to run into people who have something wrong but insist they’re right. Misconceptions can be very deeply ingrained. When they concern game rules, I’ve often found they come from being taught the game by someone else who got it wrong without ever really reading the rules for oneself.

The first time I ever played Risk (in the 1970s), I was taught by an older boy at a community center. I enjoyed the game so much that I soon bought a copy for myself. After reading the rules, it was a very different (and better) game than I was taught.

The “1942” version of the AA50 box above is prototype artwork for the box cover. It was released only as advance promotional material for the game, and no copies were printed using that design. I know this because I worked on the project.

I suspect that the same may be true of the “385” Pacific version, due to the piece count. I know that there were some discussions during development around the pieces that might be included.

I’m not sure about the Revised versions, but the second one may also be a prototype, as it is also a “flat” view of the cover art, and not in three dimensions.

I hope this helps.

@the_good_captain said in Rules Question/Clarification:

My reading of pages 20 + 26 is that if a country’s capital is in enemy hands, and a friendly power controls another factory owned by this country, the friendly power can use the factory and collect IPCs.

Yes.

I was really hoping that if Italy fell to Russia and Russia fell to Japan, that America or Britain could later use the Italian factory. "

No. You cannot capture a territory from a friendly power, whether or not that power has fallen.

If the USSR controls Italy when Moscow falls, it retains control (and cannot use the IC) until Italy is recaptured by the Axis, after which another Allied power could capture it from the Axis (and use the IC). The same applies to Karelia.

@scottbrooks The first thing you need to do is forget everything you know about 1941. This is a completely different game, with mostly different rules. Looking at it through the lens of 1941 is just going to be confusing (as you’ve already discovered). Approach learning this game as though it didn’t have “Axis & Allies” in the title, with no preconceptions, and you’ll have an easier time.

The order cards are nothing but a framework for walking the players through the game turn, sort of like a player aid. They simply remind you of the phases of the turn, and what you can do in each of them.

Having a look at the FAQ may also be helpful.

I hope this helps…

@the_good_captain Yes, that’s correct.

@chaikov Yes, you’re interpreting the rules correctly.

However, WWII submarines didn’t “block” convoys. They attacked them, causing significant losses, but not stopping them altogether. Submarines were given the ability to pass through enemy units (countered by destroyers) in order to give them better survivability so they could live to attack on their own turn. This works both ways so that players can’t flood the board with cheap blockers and slow down game play.

I hope this helps.

@gamerman01 Unfortunately, I’m not sure where, if anywhere, the FAQs are currently posted. They are scheduled to be posted on this site at some point, but it hasn’t happened yet.

@gamerman01 The only rules in the Rulebook specific to this situation are on page 21 (Europe) where it talks about multi-national forces, saying that your units load onto and offload from your ally’s transport on your turn. The FAQ elaborates further, saying this:

Q. Say the United Kingdom launches an amphibious assault from a US transport without any supporting UK sea or air units in the sea zone, and then the defender scrambles. What happens?
A. In effect, nothing happens. The US transport doesn’t participate in the sea battle because it’s not the US’s turn. Since there are no attacking sea or air units, there is no sea battle. However, the sea zone can’t be cleared of defending combat units, so the amphibious assault can’t proceed.

@chaikov It appears you’ve found a minor mistake in the FAQ. Per page 18 of the Rulebook, “If a fighter has no carrier to land on at the end of the noncombat move phase, it is destroyed.” Therefore, it’s impossible for a fighter to exist in a sea zone without a carrier at the beginning of the Mobilize Units phase. There are also several other references in the Rulebook to fighters having to be on carriers by the end of the noncombat move phase, and none to “landing” in a sea zone where a carrier will be mobilized. It’s possible this particular entry was copied from LHTR and not properly “cleaned up” for OOB.

@chaikov You’ve got it completely right for AA42, but you’re a little off for AAR. For AAR, it depends on whether you’re talking about OOB or LHTR (Larry Harris Tournament Rules), and what you’ve said appears to be a hybrid between the two.

In AAR OOB, you cannot land fighters in a sea zone in anticipation of mobilizing a carrier there. The only way to get existing fighters onto a new carrier is to have them in the territory containing the IC from which the carrier is mobilized and move them onto the new carrier upon mobilization. Yes, you correct that this could allow a fighter to in effect move 5 spaces, which is why the rule was changed in LHTR and AA42.

In AAR LHTR, it works the same way that it does in AA42.

@thedesertfox said in A question on components.:

They were the ones different from the P-38 Lightning, the other model was the Chance Vought Corsair, the plane with the bent wings. I honestly prefered those over the twin engine models since first off, those weren’t standard issue planes in the second world war, and second, I just think the Corsairs look way cooler.

The P-38 was the primary long-range fighter of the US until the introduction of the P-51 late in the war. It was produced in large numbers throughout the war and served in all of the theatres of the war.

@nerddog Unfortunately, WotC never updated the online versions of the Rulebooks with the latest changes, and Hasbro has placed those same versions on their website (Hasbro took control of Avalon Hill from WotC last year). Additionally, Hasbro has not placed the FAQs on their site, and I’m concerned that they never will. I have contacted them regarding the importance of providing the FAQs, but I have been met only with silence.

I have provided the most recent versions of all of the FAQs, including those for the out-of-print games, to this site for publication. As of now, they have not yet been posted, but I’ve been assured that they will be.

These FAQs should contain most, if not all, of the clarifications you mentioned (including the one about AAA). However, since they will not be on the Avalon Hill website, there will be individuals who will not consider them to be “official” (there were some who didn’t consider things on Larry Harris’ site to be official), even though they were previously published on the WotC site.

@superbattleshipyamato Cool. What was the category?

@the-janus said in Applying Casualties Question:

@krieghund said in Applying Casualties Question:

It’s simply because, unlike the defender’s casualties, the attacker’s have already fired, and don’t need to stick around any longer.

Correct. So here is a further question: the rules on page 5 say “The defender now rolls for a counterattack, just as the attacker rolled.” (I believe roughly the same wording is used on page 18 or 19, as well.)

If we grant that there is a distinction in the text between a “casualty” and a unit that is “lost” (and that units are only ‘lost’ after all of the opposed dice have been rolled) would it not then follow that all defending dice must be rolled, before attacking units are designated as “lost”?

No. The distinction applies only to the defender, not the attacker.

This would follow from the assertion that the defender rolls “just as the attacker” and also would not put the defender at a distinct advantage over the attacker when deciding casualties (as you suggest it would, if the defenders hits were inflicted by columns, but attackers weren’t.)

The rules do say on page 18 that the defender resolves combat “as the attacker did”, but they go on to say that the attacker’s casualties are “immediately removed from the battle board” and that “They are immediate casualties because they have already fired.” This clearly indicates that they are treated differently from the defender’s casualties in this regard, but the process is the same in all other regards.

I also believe this would explain why there is a distinction between defender’s casualties vs. attacker’s (i.e. the word literally appearing on the battle board, on the defending side, but not the attacking side.) There is still a line for “hit” attackers to be moved behind, but they are not behind a “casualty line” because “behind the casualty line” implies the mechanic of being able to shoot back, after being hit (which attackers cannot.) This might also make it more clear why one side’s “casualties” are removed on the counterattack phase, and another’s are removed on the “remove all casualties” phase.

Per page 19 of the Rulebook, the area behind the line on the attacker side of the battle board is there for placing transports in sea battles, as they participate in combat but have no attack value.