If you want to retreat, all naval units must retreat to a nearby seazone that was moved through on the way to combat. You cannot retreat AND submerge the subs. Submerging isn’t an option until the start of the next round of combat begins. So in this scenario, either the subs retreat to a nearby seazone, or they remain to submerge and another round of combat occurs.
His best play is maybe to take 2 hits on one carrier i guess and try and force some unit losses on the Japanese or hopefully keep a carrier and 2 planes
Just noticed something it's possible the real game set up was different. But shouldn't the subs that attacked and survive have to leave Sz 6? Assuming the battle happened as you seem to say: submerging or firing is step 2 of the battle sequence so on cycle one the subs decide to fire and hit the 3 carriers. Steps 3 and 4 is the rest of the firing where it seemed that the attacking planes hit an undetermined number (doesn't matter) and the defenders hit one sub and the destroyer. Step 5 is is remove casualties and step 6 is press attack or retreat. So by my understanding those 3 surviving subs should not be able to remain in Sz6 as they retreat at the end of the first cycle of combat before they get the chance to submerge again. And if you wanted to submerge them to keep them there, which would be at the start of the 2nd cycle of combat the aircraft would have to go through another cycle of combat? Or did I misunderstand the sequence of events?
I have watched all your videos about warfare, and it took a while lol. One problem though, when I explain the rules to my friends (they haven't watched the videos) they say "well I don't care about what General hand Grenade said. I wanna see it in the rulebook. He could be making up rules." This really pisses me off.
That's hilarious Keegan. I had thought about listing the page numbers and such on my videos but I decided against it because that would have made the vids even longer. Rest assured that I did read the whole book and double-checked everything before I did each section of the videos. I spent hours reading the books over and over again to make those vids so if you are having any trouble finding anything just let me know and I'll point to the exact spot you can find it.
What a confluence of rules coming to work together at the same time...other than the carriers eventually sinking, the other sinking feeling is the U.S. player's stomach when they realized that they probably lost the game there... nice vid General! I might not make through all your vids at one crack, but I do watch them all, even if it takes a few sittings. Your vids should be mandatory watching! Keep up the great content!
Great video GHG, awesome explanation... I love your stands for air units, gonna do it for my bombers only. and I love your use of the HBG coasters for blowup boxes.
Thanks YG. I actually use those coasters for mobilization zones. I have some task force markers from HBG that I use for blowup boxes. www.historicalboardgaming.com/HBG-Task-Force-Set-9-Set_p_1812.html
What I've done is paste an infantry on each of the small markers that go on the map. Each infantry is carrying a flag that matches up with the task force card. The naval markers have a battleship pasted on with flags that match up as well. My map is about 13% oversized so I don't have to use them often because each territory has more space than normal. It's really helpful in certain situations like an American fleet in the Atlantic where the spaces are a little smaller than the Pacific or the Japanese units that are inching their way to Calcutta through the bottleneck south of the Himalayas. It's quicker to move a large force too because you only move one piece instead of a number of them.
I understood everything right away and agree with applying the rules that way. But what I didn't understand, why didn't the us player assign 2 sub hits to the first carrier and 1 sub hit to the second? The third would stay in tact that way
Yeah. He likely thought he could soak most of the other hits to his planes and ideally end up with a living carrier or two and both sides losing all planes
Was there a video you had made that was kind of like a sequel to your sneaky Karl video? Where you use a fighter to sink a transport in sz 19 but you can't land it in the sz around Japan because of it's huge fleet. So you use one destroyer to "potentially" kill the fleet so you can noncombat move a carrier to land the fighter. But because the destroyer is destroyed by the fleet, you can't noncombat the carrier to land your fighter because you accept to lose your fighter. Or maybe that was YG?
The best thing to do here is to slowly remove one carrier group at a time, just in case he does retreat. So the first 2 hits you remove a carrier even if it's a sneak attack. The next 2 hits are on a pair of fighters. If your carriers are unsupported and your fighters have no where to land just expect that your opponent will retreat at the most opportune moment
GHG. This was a tasty morsel. Japan got sacked of IPCs in my first Global 40 game last year after the IJF got diced after failing to "keep up with zee Jones brothers.". I wouldve had a chance to build 3 fighters to add to three and a bomber on Kyungsu where I had an IC. Next turn I couldve bought the carriers and let USN have it. thx for this.
Of course I am being a Monday morning QB, but the bigger lesson is the importance of a diverse fleet. However, I know your board isn't set up exactly like the scenario. But if they were still under US control and the carriers had movement points left. The damaged carriers may have been able to limp to SZ 25, where the US could have landed fighters on Midway to be able to scramble and protect the CVs. But unless the US had some DDs near, the subs should have finished them off the next turn.
The other thing the US could have done is take 2 hits on one carrier instead of one on each. The American player needed to know those rules and anticipated the retreat after the first round if all their carriers were sunk. They would have had a better chance to save the 3 carriers if they could link up with other boats AND they still had 2 aircraft on defence. If nothing else they would've taken more units off of the Japanese in the exchange. You're right about the diverse fleet. The US obviously lost a lot of boats earlier and had only carriers left. They should have kept at least one destroyer with those subs in the area and lost a plane instead.
im pretty sure you cannot submerge during a battle. you have to decide when the two fleets meet and cant change that during the battle. but he can still retreat his subs to the next seazone. im not sure if planes that moved max. spaces can retreat, but for sure he cant leave them in the seazone, he would need to land them in japan or korea, so landing them on carrier was an illegal move. retreating but still remaining in the fighting zone is not legal.
Hi GinTonik, On page 19 of the Pacific Second Edition rulebook, under the heading; Step 2. Submarine Surprise strike or submerge, you will find that all attacking/defending Submarines (where no opposing Destroyer is present) have the option of rolling OR submerging at the beginning of each round of combat. They never have the option of retreating to an adjacent sz, that was in earlier editions of A&A. On page 22, under the heading; Restrictions on Placement, 3rd paragraph, you will find that you can land your fighters and tactical bombers on an aircraft carrier that you have just built (even it is in a hostile sea zone). You can never exceed your maximum range as an aircraft, not even to retreat.
GeneralHandGrenade but that would mean the aircraft cannot retreat, because retreating would need them to fall back to another territory. since they cant move any more than the 4 spaces (which they already did) and they cannot "retreat" but still remain in the same seazone as the us carriers, there is no other option than to fight on.
That's what I had originally thought too. The question of whether or not it was legal was posted in this thread; www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39910.0 The short answer is that their non-combat movement was to the carriers that were being placed on the Place Units Phase of the Japanese turn. You have to prove that you can land a plane before you take off. Buying the 3 Carriers and showing that you could land there means that you absolutely had to place your Carriers in SZ 6 and land your planes there if they weren't casualties in the battle.
GHG...I stand corrected : )) I have read that rulen a few times , but never interpredided that way before. The more times I read it the more t made sence . Almost as dirty as the 'SNEAKY KARL' THX FOR THE RULE EPLANATION ... Thx Mike ( just usuing wife email)
I thought you could not put ships into a sea zone already occupied by enemy units? Damaged or not (blockaid) If I am right the Japan player could not place the carriers and would lose his planes as well.
Read your rulebook again, Dallas. Look on page 23 of the Europe rulebook-Restrictions on placement-second paragraph and third paragraph. Good question though. I researched this Know the Rules series very well before I made these videos and all of them are spot on in regards to accuracy. I encourage you to watch the whole playlist to find other little-known or seldom used rules.
Love this game. Haven't played it in a long time. Little fuzzy on subs and a few other things. I'm also from PG and it's always tough to find people to play with
I’m confused with aircraft carriers Can you move them like transports with planes on them or not? Cause in the rule book for carriers it says something like the planes travel separately to the carrier. I am like “eh?” Please help if you can.
UnlockingSnow73 As soon as the Carrier starts to move the planes take off from the deck. The reason for this is so you don’t move your Carriers AND then move your planes 4 spaces. If you were planning on having your carriers and planes going to the same sea zone as a final destination, then you could just leave the plans on it for ease of moving the 3 pieces. It is understood that when you did that the planes actually flew there even though they didn’t appear to leave the carrier. To see how this is all demonstrated go to my video “ Naval Warfare” I explain how all boats and planes move and fight on the water. It’s a long video so if you don’t want to see it all just fast forward to the section with the Carriers
Commenting on the japanize attck on the 3 american carriers ... the 6 planes flown on that attck is illegle move ! Your planes must have a place to land during the non combat phase. Aka order of play , all of your non combat moves must be done before the next phase starts . Placing your purchases isthe last step YOU CANNOT MAKE NON COMBAT AFTER PLACING
Hi Shirley. I can assure you that the Japanese player did nothing illegal here. I make these videos about weird or often misunderstood rules to help players understand the G-40 rulebook. I encourage you to watch the other videos in this series. There is a playlist titled "Know The Rules" here on my channel. The planes used their full movement ability to make it to Sea Zone 6 where the battle was taking place. In order to do that they had to purchase 3 carriers to demonstrate that they had a legal landing space for each of the planes before they were able to move them. Japan broke off their attack after the American carriers were damaged, finished their turn, and then placed their carriers in Sea Zone 6 where they landed their planes. The planes never moved out of that zone so they didn't have to non-combat move anywhere. You can have fighters or tactical bombers end their turn in a sea zone adjacent to a factory if you had purchased a carrier to land them on. The presence of American units in that sea zone does not prevent Japan from mobilizing units there. You can find these rules on page 22 of the Pacific 1940 Second Edition Rulebook under the heading "Restrictions on Placement" in the 2nd paragraph and the 3rd paragraph.
Hi Terry. I'm not going this year to Gen Con but it is on my bucket list to do someday. This year I'm going to FMG Con to play in the Grasshopper Invitational.
Thank you GHG for your reply . I have watched ALL of your videos & they are very imformative and i applaud your efforts in making these vides!! Myself and a close friend of mine have been playing A&A for over 20 YEARS .My issue is NOT with placing your purchased carriers in a hostle seazone . The problem lyes in with you flying your planes without having a place for them to land... PRE PLACMENT ...All planes MUST have a place to land ...BEFORE YOU PLACE NEW UNITS. Order of play is the key here , technically your planes must ALREADY be landed before you move on to the next phase (placing new units)
Thank you for watching my videos, Shirley. If you read the section that I told you about you will see that you can place fighters and tactical bombers in the sea zone prior to placing your carriers there. Landing them doesn't take any movement points because they are already in the same sea zone as the carriers. There is no non-combat movement at all for the fighters in the video. They go straight from combat to collect and placement phase without moving. Read paragraph 3 on page 22 in the section that I told you about and you will see what I mean.
"A fighter or tactical bomber can land in a sea zone (even a hostile one) that is adjacent to an industrial complex you own if you will be mobilizing an aircraft carrier that you previously purchased in that zone during the mobilize new units phase." Page 21 Where units can move. Hope that helps Shirley to show it was a legal move?
If you want to retreat, all naval units must retreat to a nearby seazone that was moved through on the way to combat. You cannot retreat AND submerge the subs. Submerging isn’t an option until the start of the next round of combat begins. So in this scenario, either the subs retreat to a nearby seazone, or they remain to submerge and another round of combat occurs.
His best play is maybe to take 2 hits on one carrier i guess and try and force some unit losses on the Japanese or hopefully keep a carrier and 2 planes
Just noticed something it's possible the real game set up was different. But shouldn't the subs that attacked and survive have to leave Sz 6? Assuming the battle happened as you seem to say: submerging or firing is step 2 of the battle sequence so on cycle one the subs decide to fire and hit the 3 carriers. Steps 3 and 4 is the rest of the firing where it seemed that the attacking planes hit an undetermined number (doesn't matter) and the defenders hit one sub and the destroyer. Step 5 is is remove casualties and step 6 is press attack or retreat.
So by my understanding those 3 surviving subs should not be able to remain in Sz6 as they retreat at the end of the first cycle of combat before they get the chance to submerge again. And if you wanted to submerge them to keep them there, which would be at the start of the 2nd cycle of combat the aircraft would have to go through another cycle of combat? Or did I misunderstand the sequence of events?
I have watched all your videos about warfare, and it took a while lol. One problem though, when I explain the rules to my friends (they haven't watched the videos) they say "well I don't care about what General hand Grenade said. I wanna see it in the rulebook. He could be making up rules." This really pisses me off.
That's hilarious Keegan. I had thought about listing the page numbers and such on my videos but I decided against it because that would have made the vids even longer. Rest assured that I did read the whole book and double-checked everything before I did each section of the videos. I spent hours reading the books over and over again to make those vids so if you are having any trouble finding anything just let me know and I'll point to the exact spot you can find it.
GeneralHandGrenade discription?
What a confluence of rules coming to work together at the same time...other than the carriers eventually sinking, the other sinking feeling is the U.S. player's stomach when they realized that they probably lost the game there...
nice vid General!
I might not make through all your vids at one crack, but I do watch them all, even if it takes a few sittings.
Your vids should be mandatory watching!
Keep up the great content!
Thanks E. I've never sat through a whole one of my videos either. Like you I watch them a piece at a time.
Great video GHG, awesome explanation... I love your stands for air units, gonna do it for my bombers only. and I love your use of the HBG coasters for blowup boxes.
Thanks YG. I actually use those coasters for mobilization zones. I have some task force markers from HBG that I use for blowup boxes.
www.historicalboardgaming.com/HBG-Task-Force-Set-9-Set_p_1812.html
I've seen those, I'm not a big fan of the design... thought they could have been more creative.
What I've done is paste an infantry on each of the small markers that go on the map. Each infantry is carrying a flag that matches up with the task force card. The naval markers have a battleship pasted on with flags that match up as well. My map is about 13% oversized so I don't have to use them often because each territory has more space than normal. It's really helpful in certain situations like an American fleet in the Atlantic where the spaces are a little smaller than the Pacific or the Japanese units that are inching their way to Calcutta through the bottleneck south of the Himalayas. It's quicker to move a large force too because you only move one piece instead of a number of them.
I understood everything right away and agree with applying the rules that way. But what I didn't understand, why didn't the us player assign 2 sub hits to the first carrier and 1 sub hit to the second? The third would stay in tact that way
Probably didn't see what was about to happen
Yeah. He likely thought he could soak most of the other hits to his planes and ideally end up with a living carrier or two and both sides losing all planes
Was there a video you had made that was kind of like a sequel to your sneaky Karl video? Where you use a fighter to sink a transport in sz 19 but you can't land it in the sz around Japan because of it's huge fleet. So you use one destroyer to "potentially" kill the fleet so you can noncombat move a carrier to land the fighter. But because the destroyer is destroyed by the fleet, you can't noncombat the carrier to land your fighter because you accept to lose your fighter. Or maybe that was YG?
That doesn't ring a bell for me. If I did then I don't recall. Sorry.
@@primroselane1 Okay, thanks for responding so soon General. I'll have to keep digging then. Oh dang!! Lol
The best thing to do here is to slowly remove one carrier group at a time, just in case he does retreat. So the first 2 hits you remove a carrier even if it's a sneak attack. The next 2 hits are on a pair of fighters. If your carriers are unsupported and your fighters have no where to land just expect that your opponent will retreat at the most opportune moment
Edit: obviously with 3 sub hits it has to be only on carriers, but still one carrier at a time
I misspoke in the video. the Japanese player had one destroyer and not 2 destroyers.
GHG. This was a tasty morsel. Japan got sacked of IPCs in my first Global 40 game last year after the IJF got diced after failing to "keep up with zee Jones brothers.". I wouldve had a chance to build 3 fighters to add to three and a bomber on Kyungsu where I had an IC. Next turn I couldve bought the carriers and let USN have it. thx for this.
It definitely pays to know all of the rules
Cool I'm going to Origins game con in Columbus Ohio coming up next week.. hoping to get in a tourney there
Awesome. I hope you have fun and win some games.
Of course I am being a Monday morning QB, but the bigger lesson is the importance of a diverse fleet.
However, I know your board isn't set up exactly like the scenario. But if they were still under US control and the carriers had movement points left. The damaged carriers may have been able to limp to SZ 25, where the US could have landed fighters on Midway to be able to scramble and protect the CVs. But unless the US had some DDs near, the subs should have finished them off the next turn.
The other thing the US could have done is take 2 hits on one carrier instead of one on each. The American player needed to know those rules and anticipated the retreat after the first round if all their carriers were sunk. They would have had a better chance to save the 3 carriers if they could link up with other boats AND they still had 2 aircraft on defence. If nothing else they would've taken more units off of the Japanese in the exchange.
You're right about the diverse fleet. The US obviously lost a lot of boats earlier and had only carriers left. They should have kept at least one destroyer with those subs in the area and lost a plane instead.
im pretty sure you cannot submerge during a battle. you have to decide when the two fleets meet and cant change that during the battle. but he can still retreat his subs to the next seazone. im not sure if planes that moved max. spaces can retreat, but for sure he cant leave them in the seazone, he would need to land them in japan or korea, so landing them on carrier was an illegal move. retreating but still remaining in the fighting zone is not legal.
Hi GinTonik,
On page 19 of the Pacific Second Edition rulebook, under the heading; Step 2. Submarine Surprise strike or submerge, you will find that all attacking/defending Submarines (where no opposing Destroyer is present) have the option of rolling OR submerging at the beginning of each round of combat. They never have the option of retreating to an adjacent sz, that was in earlier editions of A&A.
On page 22, under the heading; Restrictions on Placement, 3rd paragraph, you will find that you can land your fighters and tactical bombers on an aircraft carrier that you have just built (even it is in a hostile sea zone).
You can never exceed your maximum range as an aircraft, not even to retreat.
GeneralHandGrenade but that would mean the aircraft cannot retreat, because retreating would need them to fall back to another territory. since they cant move any more than the 4 spaces (which they already did) and they cannot "retreat" but still remain in the same seazone as the us carriers, there is no other option than to fight on.
That's what I had originally thought too. The question of whether or not it was legal was posted in this thread;
www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39910.0
The short answer is that their non-combat movement was to the carriers that were being placed on the Place Units Phase of the Japanese turn. You have to prove that you can land a plane before you take off. Buying the 3 Carriers and showing that you could land there means that you absolutely had to place your Carriers in SZ 6 and land your planes there if they weren't casualties in the battle.
GHG...I stand corrected : )) I have read that rulen a few times , but never interpredided that way before. The more times I read it the more t made sence . Almost as dirty as the 'SNEAKY KARL' THX FOR THE RULE EPLANATION ... Thx Mike ( just usuing wife email)
I thought you could not put ships into a sea zone already occupied by enemy units? Damaged or not (blockaid) If I am right the Japan player could not place the carriers and would lose his planes as well.
Read your rulebook again, Dallas. Look on page 23 of the Europe rulebook-Restrictions on placement-second paragraph and third paragraph.
Good question though. I researched this Know the Rules series very well before I made these videos and all of them are spot on in regards to accuracy. I encourage you to watch the whole playlist to find other little-known or seldom used rules.
@@primroselane1 That's crazy! Thank you very much - my opponent will be surprised big time the next time we play!😅
The Japanese planes must fight or leave the sea zone
Love this game. Haven't played it in a long time. Little fuzzy on subs and a few other things.
I'm also from PG and it's always tough to find people to play with
We're always looking for more people. Of course we have to wait until it's safe to play but you should join us.
@@primroselane1 that would be awesome, would be nice to play with someone who knows what there doing to help us other guys out
I’m confused with aircraft carriers
Can you move them like transports with planes on them or not?
Cause in the rule book for carriers it says something like the planes travel separately to the carrier.
I am like “eh?”
Please help if you can.
UnlockingSnow73 As soon as the Carrier starts to move the planes take off from the deck. The reason for this is so you don’t move your Carriers AND then move your planes 4 spaces. If you were planning on having your carriers and planes going to the same sea zone as a final destination, then you could just leave the plans on it for ease of moving the 3 pieces. It is understood that when you did that the planes actually flew there even though they didn’t appear to leave the carrier.
To see how this is all demonstrated go to my video “ Naval Warfare” I explain how all boats and planes move and fight on the water. It’s a long video so if you don’t want to see it all just fast forward to the section with the Carriers
GeneralHandGrenade thank you very much.
Great video as well, that Japanese player was very clever.
Commenting on the japanize attck on the 3 american carriers ... the 6 planes flown on that attck is illegle move ! Your planes must have a place to land during the non combat phase. Aka order of play , all of your non combat moves must be done before the next phase starts . Placing your purchases isthe last step YOU CANNOT MAKE NON COMBAT AFTER PLACING
Hi Shirley. I can assure you that the Japanese player did nothing illegal here. I make these videos about weird or often misunderstood rules to help players understand the G-40 rulebook. I encourage you to watch the other videos in this series. There is a playlist titled "Know The Rules" here on my channel.
The planes used their full movement ability to make it to Sea Zone 6 where the battle was taking place. In order to do that they had to purchase 3 carriers to demonstrate that they had a legal landing space for each of the planes before they were able to move them. Japan broke off their attack after the American carriers were damaged, finished their turn, and then placed their carriers in Sea Zone 6 where they landed their planes. The planes never moved out of that zone so they didn't have to non-combat move anywhere. You can have fighters or tactical bombers end their turn in a sea zone adjacent to a factory if you had purchased a carrier to land them on. The presence of American units in that sea zone does not prevent Japan from mobilizing units there.
You can find these rules on page 22 of the Pacific 1940 Second Edition Rulebook under the heading "Restrictions on Placement" in the 2nd paragraph and the 3rd paragraph.
The planes must get out of the sea zone.
Grenade you goin to gen con in Indiana
Hi Terry. I'm not going this year to Gen Con but it is on my bucket list to do someday. This year I'm going to FMG Con to play in the Grasshopper Invitational.
Love it! Amur is so close... a beach too far
Thank you GHG for your reply . I have watched ALL of your videos & they are very imformative and i applaud your efforts in making these vides!! Myself and a close friend of mine have been playing A&A for over 20 YEARS .My issue is NOT with placing your purchased carriers in a hostle seazone . The problem lyes in with you flying your planes without having a place for them to land... PRE PLACMENT ...All planes MUST have a place to land ...BEFORE YOU PLACE NEW UNITS. Order of play is the key here , technically your planes must ALREADY be landed before you move on to the next phase (placing new units)
Thank you for watching my videos, Shirley. If you read the section that I told you about you will see that you can place fighters and tactical bombers in the sea zone prior to placing your carriers there. Landing them doesn't take any movement points because they are already in the same sea zone as the carriers. There is no non-combat movement at all for the fighters in the video. They go straight from combat to collect and placement phase without moving. Read paragraph 3 on page 22 in the section that I told you about and you will see what I mean.
"A fighter or tactical bomber can land in a sea zone (even a hostile one) that is adjacent to an industrial complex you own if you will be mobilizing an aircraft carrier that you previously purchased in that zone during the mobilize new units phase." Page 21 Where units can move. Hope that helps Shirley to show it was a legal move?
The Carriers would have 3 shots back in defense prior to the subs’ submerging....