Posts made by Noneshallpass

Some of these numbers, especially for Italy and Anzac, are way over what is really used in an average game.

I would recommend that you start playing with the pieces that you already have and use plastic tokens or any other marker for the units that you don’t have.

That way you will see what pieces you really need and those that don’t get that much use.

If you wait until you have a “complete” set before you start playing, you will never get the feel for this and it will cost you a lot of money to buy pieces that may just stay in the box.

However, take into account that most battle pieces are sold in sets of five by HBG.

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

How is this an issue? All French conditions for surrender are in the French NRS and see Rule 14.4.1 for the IPP.

This is all on the NRS. The only condition that is not USSR dependent is that Germany or Japan has surrendered.

There is no single CCP action that can trigger an allied declaration of War.

Yes. Rule 0.5.

Remember that the fortification is not simply « a wall » but « a major defensive network » (Rule 12.7).

It does affect units that attack « across that border », so you can circumvent it, but if even one unit attacks from the fortified border, then all land units will defend at +2 for the first round, as there is no other way to play the combat round.

However, you could argue that the two first strikes at 5 from the fortification itself should only hit units that actually crossed the fortified border…

As @Caesar-Seriona pointed out : just don’t do it. If you have enough units in place to attack from the unfortified border, then you should only send these into combat.

I think that they could since this rule is written without indication that it would be a one time event, but the FAQ will likely contradict me as usual.

However the use of the word « if » a foreign power declares war does raise the question of the timing of such truce. Does it need to be declared at the same time as the declaration of war? Do we need a new declaration of war for a new truce?

This was FAQ’d :

Q: If you capture a land zone during the combat phase, could you lend-lease to that territory during the same turn?

A: No

I think that both options are possible.

You can leave your units where they went for Monroe Doctrine purposes until or take them back home.

Note that reaching 50 IPP does not open all movement options yet.

Hello, for those of you who already have the game :

The rules are available online, but not the setup charts.

What neutral units are needed if you want to place them on the board and how many of each?

It’s correct that scramble is declared at the end of the Attacker’s Combat Movement (Rule 8.6).

Since you do not always declare blitzes in advance, then it could be argued that if the Defending fighters have not taken part in the first battle or used for interception, they should have the option to scramble into the second territory even if the rules do not say so.

Another view would be that since blitzing is essentially taking the enemy by surprise by rapidly pushing fast-moving armored forces into a second territory, the Defender does not have the luxury of scrambling.

Note, however, that in many cases, you will also have non-blitzing Attacking units taking part in the second battle, so in that case, the Defender should also declare scrambles at the end of the end Attacker’s Combat Movement, as per the rules.

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.

I would tend to agree also even if the rule is not clear. The Attacker rolls first and if the defending ski troop is not hit, then it can either roll for defense or retreat.

Good call in pointing out the similar mechanic for subs.

Rule 7.9 restricts lend-lease to either IPP or military units. You cannot lead-lease a fortification or other facility.

Plus, all Commonwealth NRS specify that that GB-FAC-ANZAC cannot lead-lease to each other.

While I did not find a rule that states that you can only build facilites in a territory that you possess (as opposed to a friendly territory), this seems fairly obivous.

This rule must be understood as an exception to Rules 12.7 (Fortifications) and 12.9 (Coastal artillery).

Usually, you have to decide which land/sea zone these emplacements will protect. Rule 12.8 says that some areas are so small that all borders are protected.

I have always understood 12.8 (a) to be referring to a named territory, that can be shown either as a single island (Crete) or a group of islands (Philippines, Midway, Solomon Islands).

While the wording is a bit vague, I never undestrood this to include the larger islands that are composed of multiple named territories. They are not “small areas” of the map if they encompass more than one territory.

@Trig and @TheVeteran and I are all saying the same thing.

All units defend at the number that they were at the start of the combat round.

So it does not matter if they take a hit (except for first strikes) and if the result of the hit is to destroy them or, as in the case of capital ships, move them to a lower Defense roll level that will only apply at the start of the next combat round.

To complete the answer to the damaged Battleship question, the Rule 9.1 for combat procedure covers that.

The Attacker and Defender place their units on the Battle Boards « on the number that corresponds to their Attack of Defense values ».

« Defending units (including those chosen as casualties) get their defense rolls. »

So the undamaged Battleship started at 8 and will roll at 8 no matter what.

After it is damaged, it will be moved to 6 for the next round.

Bidding usually means that you can choose your turn order. So win an go last then win and go first.

The capacity to play 2 turns in a row (3 for Germany if you count Blitzkrieg), combined with units that have themselves a blitz ability seems simply too overwhelming. You could be from the Soviet border into Moscow before the USSR player can do anything about it and he can’t outbid you to prevent it early in the game due to the income difference.

To compare with the bid mechanic in War Room, ressources are much more comparable for major powers (everybody is at war), all turns are simultaneous and combat ends movement (no blitz). Turn order is still important but not crushing.

I think that the variance in the dice nicely reflects the pre-war politics. It was not granted that the USA would get involved in the War. It took an attack on Pearl Harbor. Stalin did not want to believe that Germany would attack the USSR despite all intelligence to the contrary. The D12 outcome may represent the relative influence of different political opinions towars war within a nation. There are breaking points, but the Axis have to manage rapid expansion vs provocation. It’s part of the fun of this game to have alternative outcomes and that not all games follow the histrorical timeline for declarations of War. A year or two delaying the USA into the war may make all the difference for the Axis.

Yes and losing one or two of those planes to a lucky roll will greatly cost Japan and handicap other operations with nothing much to show for in compensation.

@HBG-GW-Enthusiast I prefer giving credit to the game designers and leaving games as they were made.

This means that I have to accept that I am not that great at Chess (even if a random promotion of a Pawn to a Rook after x moves would help me) and can get lucky or unlucky in Poker (even when we are way passed due the Ace of Spades coming on the river).

GW1936 has both a preset and random aspect in peacetime increases so that all games don’t turn out the same. I respect your choice to house rules your games. It’s just the pretention of a universal luck/fun ratio that I don’t buy at all.

Yes, and lets get rid of these very not fun games that also rely too much on luck like Poker, Twilight Struggle, Catan…

It does not really make sense to be able to use a surprise attack against the Commonwealth when you are already at War with them. The condition that you must use the attack on the turn that Japan declares War is not really met.

If you can only declare War against the USA, you should only be able to surprise attack the USA. However, the wording does suggest otherwise.

Ok was confusing with the narrow crossing. I guess the minor port can be bombed.