AAG40 FAQ

It’s the same in Pacific.

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

You forgot China

Calvin, you nitpicker.  What do you mean I forgot China?  China starts at war with Japan.

UK can’t fly units over China until at war with Japan

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

You forgot China

Calvin, you nitpicker.  What do you mean I forgot China?  China starts at war with Japan.

UK can’t fly units over China until at war with Japan

Why not?  China is not neutral.  UK is not neutral.

The special China rules. Just like how UK can’t enter China until at war with Japan, even though both powers are at war

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

You forgot China

Calvin, you nitpicker.  What do you mean I forgot China?  China starts at war with Japan.

UK can’t fly units over China until at war with Japan

Why not?  China is not neutral.  UK is not neutral.

The special China rules. Just like how UK can’t enter China until at war with Japan, even though both powers are at war

But a flyover isn’t the same as entering, is it? (And can you possibly think of an example when the UK would ever fly over Chinese territory when not at war with Japan?  That’s why I call it nitpicking)

They would do it to enter Russia or Hong Kong

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

The special China rules. Just like how UK can’t enter China until at war with Japan, even though both powers are at war

Yes, UK entering China is considered an act of war by Japan.  But what is the definition of “entering”?  I wouldn’t think a fly-over is “entering”.  Is this clarified in the P40 FAQ?  Point me to the exact statement on a page number in the manual or a specific Q&A on the FAQ.  I have never seen anything that specifically states a fly-over over China is an act of war or is unallowed by the UK.

It was said by Krieg when I asked(about 6 months ago) whether UK planes can fly over Japanese territory to land in Hong Kong

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

It was said by Krieg when I asked(about 6 months ago) whether UK planes can fly over Japanese territory to land in Hong Kong

You mean Chinese?

So it’s another example of something they didn’t think of when writing the rulebook (or FAQ).

But in WW2 it wasn’t like it is now - you didn’t have no-fly zones and high tech radar.  The Japs wouldn’t even know if the UK was flying over China nor would they consider that an act of war against Japan.  Bad rule!

I meant Japanese-held territories. he said yes, as long as they’re not original Chinese territories, which sort of makes the ability to overfly Jap territories useless since the only nonisland is Siam, which is not strategically placed.

In real life, Siam would border Malaya, and Shan State would not

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

In real life, Siam would border Malaya, and Shan State would not

I didn’t say I liked the fictitious geographical boundaries.  At least “Panama” doesn’t border EUS anymore.  That was weird.  The worst thing is how the boards don’t line up at all if you put WUS against CUS, and how you have to refer to a page in the manual to see which sea zones border which across the end of the boards.  :x

As opposed to trying to visualize them when the board is set up?

@gamerman01:

@calvinhobbesliker:

As opposed to trying to visualize them when the board is set up?

No, as opposed to having the borders of the zones actually line up when you put the boards together.  You can “visualize” them on the previous versions of A&A, so why is this one so confusing that one player is asking if Z10 borders a zone on the other board?  You shouldn’t need the manual to tell you that, is my point.

I see. However, they made the Pacific board first, and I thing there was a good reason CUS and EUS were “taller” than WUS: since they are thinner and need to be the same area

Besides, the only sea units that will probably cross sides are US ships using the Panama canal. All you have to remember there is that the path is Z10-11-89-101

I’m having some questions regarding the UK Europe and UK Pacific division: wouldn’t it make more sense for them to have separate Build Units/Place Units/Collect Income phases and common Combat Move/Combat/Non Combat Move phases?

I say this because besides the confusion between knowing which units belong to which side in the Indian Ocean, Persia, India, etc., it really doesn’t make sense that they move separately on those theatres.

Plus the UK gets a possible major advantage over Japan: UK Europe units can punch a hole on Japanese lines for UK Pacific units to exploit right after.

@Hobbes:

I’m having some questions regarding the UK Europe and UK Pacific division: wouldn’t it make more sense for them to have separate Build Units/Place Units/Collect Income phases and common Combat Move/Combat/Non Combat Move phases?

Yes, it would.  That’s why that’s exactly how it works.  8-)