AAG40 FAQ

[kcdzim]

@ViribusUnitis:

Nah, not really. But doesn’t really matter. Looks like I understood something wrong. Thanks anyway.

In Alpha 3, while the US is neutral, they cannot end a noncombat move in a seazone adjacent to a japanese territory.  They can pass through such a seazone, and that is usually how one would reinforce the philippines; they cannot END a move next to a japanese territory.

While neutral, the US does not have a combat move phase.

[loki17]

In Alpha 3+ when  Japan is not at war with the British, can they fly over British territories?

[kcdzim]

@loki17:

In Alpha 3+ when  Japan is not at war with the British, can they fly over British territories?

Yes, and they have been able to in all iterations of the rules as well.

1. A power that is not neutral is free to fly over other territories with aircraft.
2. Japan begins at war with China.
3. UK/Anzac begin at war with Germany & Italy (even on the pacific boards, as only Russia has board specific neutrality).

4. Neither Japan or UK are neutral, therefore both can fly over each other’s territories.

The exception to the rules is that the UK or Anzac are not permitted to enter Chinese territories as a condition of their relations with Japan.  Doing so requires a declaration of war on Japan by UK/ANZAC prior to movement into China, even for flyovers.

[shohoku201]

When a sub attacks a destroyer and transport and on the first round both attacking sub and defending destroyer hits, does the defending transport survive?

[kcdzim]

@shohoku201:

When a sub attacks a destroyer and transport and on the first round both attacking sub and defending destroyer hits, does the defending transport survive?

Yes.  In such a battle, once all defending units besides transports are destroyed, an attacking unit with an attack value must remain alive after all casualties have been removed in order to clear the seazone of transports.

[techroll42]

That’s right. The point of “defenseless transports” is to eliminate potentially endless rolling. If you can’t roll, no defenseless transports, no killing.

Note that Aircraft Carriers can’t destroy defending transports.

[ViribusUnitis]

Is a Destroyer allowed to ignore Subs?

[gamerman01]

@ViribusUnitis:

Is a Destroyer allowed to ignore Subs?

Everything can ignore subs and transports (note that they have been playing with rules about unescorted subs unloading in combat move over a defending sub - this is the only possible exception)

[wheatbeer]

The current A3 rules on Larry Harris Game design give the US the follow NO:

5 IPCs for each turn that the US has at least one land unit in the territory “France”. Theme: Great Alliance collaboration

Is this meant to include Normandy and South France as well? (the quotation marks are making me second guess myself here)

[techroll42]

I’m pretty sure it means France as in the territory containing Paris ONLY, otherwise it would’ve said “French Homeland Territories”

[Young Grasshopper]

@wheatbeer:

The current A3 rules on Larry Harris Game design give the US the follow NO:

5 IPCs for each turn that the US has at least one land unit in the territory “France”. Theme: Great Alliance collaboration

Is this meant to include Normandy and South France as well? (the quotation marks are making me second guess myself here)

The “territory” France means Paris.

[Little_Boot]

@kcdzim:

@loki17:

In Alpha 3+ when  Japan is not at war with the British, can they fly over British territories?

Yes, and they have been able to in all iterations of the rules as well.

1. A power that is not neutral is free to fly over other territories with aircraft.
2. Japan begins at war with China.
3. UK/Anzac begin at war with Germany & Italy (even on the pacific boards, as only Russia has board specific neutrality).

4. Neither Japan or UK are neutral, therefore both can fly over each other’s territories.

The exception to the rules is that the UK or Anzac are not permitted to enter Chinese territories as a condition of their relations with Japan.  Doing so requires a declaration of war on Japan by UK/ANZAC prior to movement into China, even for flyovers.

For that last part, can UK fly over territories that were originally Chinese if they are held by Japan (including the coastal territories)? 
Also, can you retreat after you have destroyed every enemy unit in a battle?

[techroll42]

I believe no to 1, but I’m not sure.

As for #2, no.

[KillOFzee]

I would like to ask a question.

Can the US, while not at war, move its Atlantic fleet into Seazone 106, and its ground forces into New Brunswick/Nova Scotia?

If not, then what exactly is the purpose of Canadian territories?

[techroll42]

No but they can when at war.

And they’re there because Canada exists…

[gamerman01]

@KillOFzee:

I would like to ask a question.

Can the US, while not at war, move its Atlantic fleet into Seazone 106, and its ground forces into New Brunswick/Nova Scotia?

If not, then what exactly is the purpose of Canadian territories?

??  That’s a very strange question.
You do realize that once America is at war, she can use Canadian territories at will?
Before that, Canadian territories are very good at holding UK units!

[JamesAleman]

A few questions, some are review but I don’t remember the answers. Thanks.

1. US takes Korea turn 3-due to Japan DOW on allies turn 3. Can USSR move into USA’s Korea turn 4, without a DOW on Japan?

2. Allied armada in z6(Japan). On UK turn, they send 5 air units to strafe Japan-to weaken for Anzac capture. Can Japan scramble (to escape being strafed) and engage the UK navy and transports, that are not moved during Combat phase and plan to move during Noncombat? Will this freeze them? Can they move out first? Can they pick up land units and drop off land units (during combat, but as a noncombat move elsewhere)? Can the UK navy retreat, and since they did not attack from a zone, what zone can they retreat to? (This can autokill transports if UK has a small navy, compared to the allied force and are forbidden a retreat)-seems broken. Can Japan Kamikaze the navy as a result of the air only attack on Japan, thus clearing the 1 or 2 surface vessels and autokilling the UK transports within a giant multinational fleet? If no air attack on Japan, can Japan scramble anyway to freeze the navy so they get no Noncombat move?

3. Japan builds 1 DD to prevent US armada from loading off of Korea. Is that right per page 13 AAE40 rulebook? Should the rule be changed to permit declared amphibious assaults that not only unload, but also permit loading in the zone after the naval battle. Seems broken as 8 IPCs locks down the whole US fleet indefinitely as they can not pick up the men during combat or noncombat without using a second transport fleet or moving by land to a different sea zone for next turn.

Suggestion: Either restrict building in hostile waters; or force a battle during combat move of the builders turn(permit attacking with your production in effect); or permit the DD to be ignored for loading purposes; or force a battle during the place units phase of the builders turn as a special combat after placement with the producer getting defense dice and the aggressor getting assault dice, thus enabling the zone to be clear on the aggressors next turn, but still permit the placement of naval units in hostile waters-thus forcing a resolution to the contested zone. Permit the multinational aggressors a special joint strike, or permit them to choose which ally engages first, then second, then third until the zone is not contested; or permit a special preturn resolve hostile sea zone just before the aggressors turn begins to resolve the dispute and proceed normally this means the first ally in the lineup has to engage first; or permit the aggressors a 1 space move(retreat) prior to beginning their next turn(thus ensuring they start out in a friendly zone); or permit the aggressors a 1 space move(retreat) just after the hostile units are placed before beginning the next turn, thus ensuring a friendly zone. The easiest is simply to change the hostile zone rule so that it no longer restricts loading.

4. Anzac and UK are at war with Germany and Italy at start of game per page 33, top paragraph of AAE40 rulebook. They also share a territory in Egypt OOB,A2, and A3. Can India and Anzac units move into each others territories and carriers/transports without a DOW on Japan? UK can land air units on Dutch Java per rulebook, can Anzac also land its air units there and land units and convert the Dutch territory to Anzac thus having UK planes on an Anzac territory on the Pacific Board?

5. Japan has 2 subs in z6. USA sends transports, air units, and a dd,ca escort, choosing to not battle the subs so they can take Korea. Can Japan Kamikaze the dd and ca, thus forcing a sea battle and permit the now active subs the option to fend off the helpless transports? Can a scramble activate the subs, and thus fend off the transports assuming the subs hit (the dd and ca being the only targets they can hit) and the USA hits are applied to the defending Japanese planes?

[gamerman01]

@JamesAleman:

A few questions, some are review but I don’t remember the answers. Thanks.

1. US takes Korea turn 3-due to Japan DOW on allies turn 3. Can USSR move into USA’s Korea turn 4, without a DOW on Japan?

No, USSR cannot join Allies in Pacific map until at war with Japan

2. Allied armada in z6(Japan). On UK turn, they send 5 air units to strafe Japan-to weaken for Anzac capture. Can Japan scramble (to escape being strafed) and engage the UK navy and transports, that are not moved during Combat phase and plan to move during Noncombat? Will this freeze them? Can they move out first? Can they pick up land units and drop off land units (during combat, but as a noncombat move elsewhere)? Can the UK navy retreat, and since they did not attack from a zone, what zone can they retreat to? (This can autokill transports if UK has a small navy, compared to the allied force and are forbidden a retreat)-seems broken. Can Japan Kamikaze the navy as a result of the air only attack on Japan, thus clearing the 1 or 2 surface vessels and autokilling the UK transports within a giant multinational fleet? If no air attack on Japan, can Japan scramble anyway to freeze the navy so they get no Noncombat move?

Too many questions all put together for me. � I’ll leave it for someone else, or for you to break it down.

3. Japan builds 1 DD to prevent US armada from loading off of Korea. Is that right per page 13 AAE40 rulebook?

Yes. �

Should the rule be changed to permit declared amphibious assaults that not only unload, but also permit loading in the zone after the naval battle.

No.

Seems broken as 8 IPCs locks down the whole US fleet indefinitely as they can not pick up the men during combat or noncombat without using a second transport fleet or moving by land to a different sea zone for next turn.

As you said, the land units could be moved to a different territory for pickup on the next turn. � Or, move the fleet to a different zone so that you can eliminate blockers, and then move in to Z6 with the transports and pick up ground units in noncom. 
This ability to block loading with a destroyer is no different than the decades old rule that one infantry unit stops unlimited tanks from blitzing through, or that one destroyer can block unlimited fleet from passing through. � Those are the rules, and they’re fair for both sides. � You know the rules, so play accordingly.

Suggestion: Either restrict building in hostile waters; or force a battle during combat move of the builders turn(permit attacking with your production in effect); or permit the DD to be ignored for loading purposes; or force a battle during the place units phase of the builders turn as a special combat after placement with the producer getting defense dice and the aggressor getting assault dice, thus enabling the zone to be clear on the aggressors next turn, but still permit the placement of naval units in hostile waters-thus forcing a resolution to the contested zone. Permit the multinational aggressors a special joint strike, or permit them to choose which ally engages first, then second, then third until the zone is not contested; or permit a special preturn resolve hostile sea zone just before the aggressors turn begins to resolve the dispute and proceed normally this means the first ally in the lineup has to engage first; or permit the aggressors a 1 space move(retreat) prior to beginning their next turn(thus ensuring they start out in a friendly zone); or permit the aggressors a 1 space move(retreat) just after the hostile units are placed before beginning the next turn, thus ensuring a friendly zone. The easiest is simply to change the hostile zone rule so that it no longer restricts loading.

So house rule it. � This is not the proper venue to vent your frustration with the official rules. � Larry doesn’t even read this. � PM Larry on his site or Krieghund.

4. Anzac and UK are at war with Germany and Italy at start of game per page 33, top paragraph of AAE40 rulebook. They also share a territory in Egypt OOB,A2, and A3. Can India and Anzac units move into each others territories and carriers/transports without a DOW on Japan?

Yes

UK can land air units on Dutch Java per rulebook, can Anzac also land its air units there and land units and convert the Dutch territory to Anzac thus having UK planes on an Anzac territory on the Pacific Board?

Yes, there is no issue with UK and ANZAC sharing. � Yes, they can both take Dutch territories. � Yes, the UK can land on ANZAC territory from the beginning of the game.

5. Japan has 2 subs in z6. USA sends transports, air units, and a dd,ca escort, choosing to not battle the subs so they can take Korea. Can Japan Kamikaze the dd and ca, thus forcing a sea battle and permit the now active subs the option to fend off the helpless transports? Can a scramble activate the subs, and thus fend off the transports assuming the subs hit (the dd and ca being the only targets they can hit) and the USA hits are applied to the defending Japanese planes?

Scramble would activate the subs, yes. � Not sure about kamikazes without looking into it.

[kcdzim]

@Gamerman01:

@JamesAleman:

3. Japan builds 1 DD to prevent US armada from loading off of Korea. Is that right per page 13 AAE40 rulebook?

Yes. �

Should the rule be changed to permit declared amphibious assaults that not only unload, but also permit loading in the zone after the naval battle.

No.

Seems broken as 8 IPCs locks down the whole US fleet indefinitely as they can not pick up the men during combat or noncombat without using a second transport fleet or moving by land to a different sea zone for next turn.

Doesn’t sound like you have all your facts straight. The USA can eliminate the destroyer in combat. � Then during noncombat, the USA could load up all the transports. � The USA could then not be stopped from invading Japan on the next turn. � Or, as you said, the land units could be moved to a different territory for pickup on the next turn. � This is no different than the decades old rule that one infantry unit stops unlimited tanks from blitzing through, or that one destroyer can block unlimited fleet from passing through. � Those are the rules, and they’re fair for both sides. � You know the rules, so play accordingly.

No, he’s right.  If America attacks the destroyer in SZ6, the transports are involved in the battle in that seazone.  That means they cannot load during noncombat as they participated in a combat.

A single destroyer completely locks down the use of transports during noncombat in that example.

[gamerman01]

Oh - right.
Well, that’s a pretty big weakness with setting up shop in Korea, then.

So yes, your best option in that situation is to move your forces to a neighboring territory, or you could move all the transports (or whole fleet) to a different sea zone.  Then in the next turn after that you could sink any blocker, and then load the transports in noncom.