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?

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.

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

I have created a new topic with a file containing the rules. Could someone please “sticky” it? Thanks.

It is legal to move a fighter to attack a sea zone as long as it’s possible (no matter how unlikely) that the fighter can be picked up by a carrier afterwards. (One carrier cannot be used to justify attacking two different sea zones, as it cannot be in two places at once.) If the fighter survives and a carrier can move to pick it up (either the original or another one), it must do so. The fighter may only be allowed to crash if the circumstances after all combat is complete make it impossible to pick it up. If more than one fighter has to be picked up, but there is only one carrier available, the owner may choose which fighter to pick up, if a choice is available, but one must be picked up.

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

Harris Game Design is back up!

@Cernel:

In Revised OOB, if a unit was already loaded before the turn, can you offload it during Non Combat Movement, if the transport offloaded something during Combat Movement, but only as long as you offload it into the same territory? And, one way or another, nothing changes whether the transport took part in a victorious sea battle too or not?

Correct.

@Cernel:

For example, you have 1 infantry already loaded on the transport. You load 1 second infantry on the transport, sending it into a sea borne assault, during Combat Movement. Then, if you conquer it, can you offload the already loaded infantry, to the same territory, during Non Combat Movement? And how about if the already loaded unit is an AA gun, rest being the same?

These are both legal.

@Cernel:

Also, I’m fairly sure that at least for any rulesets from Revised LHTR onwards a transport may never offload in both Combat and Non Combat Movement, which is the case for Classic too. So the matter here, then, would be whether Revised OOB is the only one exception to this general rule or not.

The original Europe (1999) and Pacific (2001) games also allow this, but no others do.

@Cernel:

Shorter version, I’m substantially asking if in Revised OOB you can ever offload in both Combat and Non Combat Movement and, if so, in what cases (full list)?

The only circumstances under which a transport may offload in both combat and noncombat movement are those that you have described above.

@Cernel said in Classic rules, and some disagreements.:

@djensen renamed this section as “Axis & Allies Classic” (it was called “Axis & Allies 2nd Edition”, or something like that, in the old forum, I recall), that I think it is going to be confusing (we have a good example right here). I suggested to name it “Axis & Allies (Classic) 1st/2nd/3rd Edition” or “Axis & Allies 1st/2nd/3rd Edition” (just adding “Classic” between parenthesis or in the description), but this has been already discussed here:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/32567/chicago-nfl-team-bears
Calling it the current way would have been fine if the description would have been something like:
Includes MB Gamemaster Series 1st and 2nd editions, and the two Hasbro Interactive (CD-ROM) 3rd Edition.
or like it is called in the official Larry Harris forum:
Original Axis & Allies 1984-2004
(though this is rather vague, or surely not very clear)
but I see it currently is:
The original MB Gamemaster Series game from 1984-2004
that is substantially a wrong description, as long as @Krieghund or anybody can confirm the 3rd edition is Classic too, as I believe it is, and those are not part of the Gamemaster Series.

Yes, 3rd Edition is part of Classic. I’m not sure what your problem is with the nomenclature, though. While “Classic” may mean different things to different people, its proper usage is really in reference to the MB version and its computer offshoots.

@Krieghund can you please confirm this is what it is supposed to happen:

If you have 1 submarine and 1 fighter attacking 1 transport and 1 submarine, if the attacking submarine misses and both defending units hit:

• In 1st/2nd edition, you only lose the attacking submarine, as long as the attacking player doesn’t take a fighter as casualty when the transport hits (that would be absolutely idiotic).
• In 3rd edition, you lose both attacking units (you are not permitted to do the trick of assigning the transport’s hit to the submarine, thus being unable to assign the submarine’s hit to anything else).

Confirmed.

If the above is true, I’m curious what is the implied intended rule for assigning defensive submarines and others hits (say, if you would be playing by 3rd edition rules on a board). Should defending submarines hits be assigned before anything else or should you assign them at the same time, but taking care to lose the maximum number of units you can (I know in practice both would work the same)?

The latter.

I agree that a strict reading of the exemption rule in and of itself would indicate that Dutch territories could be claimed by AAA, as this case is not mentioned explicitly. I wrestled with this for a while before making my ruling. However, I also believe there’s enough wiggle room there when combined with the rules on Dutch territories and friendly neutrals to interpret it the other way, for the reasons I’ve outlined. The fact that we’re even having this conversation supports the view that there are two ways to interpret it.

For what it’s worth, I am certain that Larry didn’t want AAA to claim Dutch territories, any more than he wanted them to convert friendly neutrals, for the reasons I stated. This in itself wouldn’t cause me to rule the way that I did, but in combination with the aforementioned “wiggle room”, I deemed it to be enough. If I had my way, there would be an FAQ update to reflect this, but getting one these days is like pulling teeth.

As an aside, this issue was originally addressed in the AAE40 1st Edition FAQ, at the same time that the 2nd Editions of both games were being developed. The AAA exception should have noted this case explicitly in AAP40, but it simply got dropped during the development of the 2nd Edition and it has remained lost until now.

@gen-manstein Sorry, I don’t understand your question.

@cernel Since my name was “dropped”, I’ll respond to this.

You are correct. The original question (which @Panther answered correctly) only asked whether or not escort fighters were included in AA fire. Apparently @The_Good_Captain extended that answer to cover how AA fire is conducted incorrectly. Per the rules on page 25 of the Rulebook, when there’s a mix of fighters and bombers involved, each group is rolled for separately.

@c82rcn It is three spaces. See the example of air unit movement on page 15 of the Rulebook.

@the_good_captain said in Dutch Territories & +30 rule:

@krieghund wow. thank you sir. I looked for this and was convinced it was a ghost. Is there any reason this isn’t on the resources-download page of this website? https://www.axisandallies.org/resources-downloads/

I couldn’t say, as I am not involved in the management of this site. It does seem that this page needs some updating.

(its also not here: https://axisallies.com/rule-books/ although I understand they may not be affiliated)

I was not aware of this site. It doesn’t seem to be up-to-date. I would be wary of such fan-made sites, as they are not always well-maintained.

@mikemikemike said in Dutch Territories & +30 rule:

@the_good_captain sorry, right church… wrong pew ! two separate subjects as you correctly point out.

OK, now I’m confused. Is your question about this one-time bonus? If not, what is it about?

@the_good_captain said in Dutch Territories & +30 rule:

@krieghund @mikemikemike I think the confusion is stemming from some members referring to a “one time bonus” in this thread that insofar as I can tell, does not exist. Please correct if I am wrong.

It does indeed exist. From the FAQ:

Page 9, The Political Situation, The United States: This paragraph should read “The United States begins the game neutral. It may not declare war on Japan unless Japan first declares war on it or makes an unprovoked declaration of war against the United Kingdom or ANZAC. Following any such unprovoked declaration of war by Japan, the United States will receive an immediate one-time bonus payment of 30 IPCs, representing the total mobilization and transfer of military assets within the continental United States. However, if the United States is still not at war with Japan by the Collect Income phase of its third turn, it may declare war on Japan at the beginning of that phase. This is an exception to the rules for declaring war (see “Declaring War,” page 11), which may normally be done only at the beginning of the Combat Move phase.” (Note that this change applies only to the Pacific rules, and not to the Global rules.)

@mikemikemike
The bonus is still in effect. There is no “new” errata that removes it. Perhaps your friend is thinking of the fact that the bonus applies only to the Pacific game, and not the Global game?

@mikemikemike said in Submarine surprise attack:

@krieghund said in Submarine surprise attack:

A unit that takes a hit from a Surprise Strike is removed immediately and does not return fire.  The only exceptions are a battleship which is taking its first hit (as it not destroyed) and a sub which also gets a Surprise Strike (as it is firing at the same time).

And an Aircraft Carrier, too.

Carriers do not have two hits in this game.

Transports are no different than other units in this game as regards casualties. They don’t need to be taken last, and they are not automatically destroyed when alone. If you choose to sacrifice your warships to protect your transports, they can retreat if they survive.

The site is currently experiencing technical difficulties. It should return relatively soon.