AAG40 FAQ

It was a typo and has been corrected already.  W. Germany still has 3 tactical bombers.

AA Guns fire 3 dice each, all at once, and before all combat, right? Or do they fire 1 dice each before all combat, for a maximum of 3 rounds of combat?

In SBR do you still add 2 to the roll of a Strategic bomber?

If Amur is attacked via amphibious assault, and all invading units were loaded from a territory other than Manchuria or Korea, is the Mongolian penalty (bonus depending on your point of view) still activated?

No to both.

Now that AA guns can be taken as casaulties, this question actually has some relevance.

What comes first, AA guns firing at planes, or shore bombardment?

Me and my friend and dad, occasionally, when new rules come out, if we run into one that we don’t like, run a game with and a game without. I don’t remember exactly when that rule was changed, but I remember being taught back on the original version of casaulties being removed immediately, and we stuck with it that way.

May I build a Major IC in Kiangsu or Manchuria as Japan?

If you read page 9 of the Pacific Rulebook: Chinese territories on the game board have a Nationalist Chinese nationality symbol on them. Some of these territories begin the game already under Japanese control. They still are considered Chinese territories for purposes of original ownership.

Alpha-Rules say: Major industrial complexes can only be built on originally controlled territories (this includes upgrading minor ones). Likewise they may not be upgraded when captured. Major industrial complexes are reduced to minor when captured. The original owner of the territory may upgrade it if the territory is recaptured.

No.  You may only build a major IC in a territory that has your power’s emblem printed on it.

Under Alpha 2+ rules (pertaining to a game I started before I knew 3 was out), regarding the 12 IPC NO between Russia and Japan, if the US takes Korea, can the USSR move into it without triggering the NO?

If so, would Japan trying to retake Korea trigger the NO for the Soviets?

If possible, I’d like to have an answer soon, as it is likely coming up in an hour or two.

@Krieghund:

@Ruanek:

I think that if Japan took a Japanese territory Germany could enter it without declaring war on China.

True.

this is a similar situation, and since the germans can occupy japan-controlled china, w/out DOW on china, i think ussr can occupy usa controlled korea, w/out DOW japan.

@kdfsjljklgjfg:

Under Alpha 2+ rules (pertaining to a game I started before I knew 3 was out), regarding the 12 IPC NO between Russia and Japan, if the US takes Korea, can the USSR move into it without triggering the NO?

No.  Unless USSR declares war on Japan, it is under the restrictions of a neutral power on the Pacific map, so it may not leave its own territories.

This question is for Alpha 2.

A US transport, loaded with UK soldiers, and some US warships sit in SZ112.  The UK does not have any warships in or move any warships into SZ112.

1. If the UK unloads its soldiers into Denmark, Germany has no scramble option because US transports can’t be casualties during the UK’s turn.

2. However, if a German sub sits in SZ112 the UK troops cannot unload because no UK warships are present (the presence of non-UK Allied warships is irrelevant).

3. If the UK and US are both at war with Japan, but the US is still neutral to Germany, a UK amphibious assault against Germany via US transports is still permitted.

Did I understand these 3 points correctly?

1. No.  Germany may scramble in response to the amphibious assault.  Since UK has no attacking units, the sea zone cannot be cleared and the assault cannot proceed.  However, since the US ships are not involved in the battle, no casualties will result (a stalemate).

2. Correct.

3. No.  Transports belonging to a power not at war with the target may not participate in an amphibious assault.

Thanks for clarifying, saved me some major errors  :-)

How can you even say “major errors” with a straight face, I presume.

This Rules debacle seen thru the iterations of Alpha 1, Alpha 2 and now Alpha 3
is absolutely ludricous.

I fully expect an Alpha 4, I had predicted a Gamma version weeks ago.

There is no longer any credibilty whatsoever to the whole revision process.

I look on this whole process as too many cooks spoiling the soup.

There no longer is any concensus on Rules.

You can’t just play 1940 anymore.

Ah which Rules do YOU play?

OOB, Alpha 1, Alpha 1+ or Alpha 2. Maybe Alpha 2 +?

I mean Hello, stop the madness.

I mean it really is nonsense now.

Our group rules have as much credibilty as Larry Harris’ because his credibilty has long been broken.

The rules have been shown to be arbritary becz they are constantly broken and revised JUST BECZ THEY CAN BE.

The whole Rules Show is just a JOKE and the joke is on all of you.

Not me, I dropped out long ago and play OOB with some tinkering.

Did not burn the House down as did Larry and his expert Kreighund.

Just around the corner, right!

I mean really, there is no wrong answer to any Rules question!!

Just make it up. The experst have been doing so for months.

Ohhh the Amur question is just confounding isn’t it.

Ohhhhh  Mufasa……

@Shakespeare:

The rules have been shown to be arbritary becz they are constantly broken and revised JUST BECZ THEY CAN BE.

Rules are, by their nature, arbitrary and subject to change.

I haven’t seen anyone on this forum demean playing by house rules.  Even if they did, nothing stops anyone from playing by any rules they wish, except the willingness of opponents to agree upon said rules and the constraints of physics.

This may have been answered, but can US ships in Pacific use allied ports for movement before US is at war?