AAG40 FAQ

Can you upgrade a minor factory if its damaged?

@kcdzim:

@Auswanderersland:

Question regarding SBR, it has not come up before for us.

When sending bombers for SBR and the interceptor combat is concluded, are bombers required to choose a target to bomb or may they decline acting as “escorts” for the bombers that do decide to bomb.

Alpha 2 and Alpha 3 how does this apply.

Situation:
We want to send 15 bombers to bomb a MIC and it has 1 fighter in space, but we only want to use one bomber to bomb and let the other 14 bombers act as “escorts”.

Yeah, that’s not how it works.

Tactical Bombers do not act as “escorts”.  Only fighters can be used as “escorts”  Tactical Bombers can be taken as casualties to fire from interceptors, the same as Strategic Bombers can, and generally will be selected first, but that doesn’t make them “escorts” and it confuses forum readers when they’re called that.  It is a known loophole that tactical bombers can shield strategic bombers in certain circumstances, but only fighters are used as “escorts”

Now that that’s clear, when interceptor combat is finished, tactical bombers (and strategic bombers) CANNOT choose to disengage.  If you send tactical bombers on a strategic bombing mission, they MUST have a legal target to bomb (a naval base or air base MUST be in the territory, though you don’t need to declare which you’ll hit) and they MUST continue on after interceptor/escort/defensive fire to a naval or air base (selected at this point, and then the installation fires AA at the tactical bombers).

Just out of curiosity, did they address why bombers cannot disengage? Much as an amphibious assault can be scrapped after the result of a scramble, it seems logical that additional bombing could be scrapped after the intercept phase…since as scrambling permits the attack on a non contested sea zone due to the potential for a battle, additional bombing sent as a buffer for the possible battle from an intercept should follow the same established mechanic. The only reason to send escorts and extra bombers is because of the creation of the intercept rule, otherwise the need would not arise. This would permit the additional bombers to “escort” as well, especially given an SBR strategy that creates massed bombers. Much as the real war, massed bombers were dangerous towards the end due to attrition on the defending side.

makes sense!  Thanks Gamerman!

I have the Alpha+3 rules along with the original global rules from the box, and I need a little clarification:
If Germany takes the UK’s capital (i.e. London), can the US player then enter Quebec, claim it by putting his marker on it, adjust his IPC chart up by 2, and use the factory on his next turn?

@Gamerman01:

@QuickQuestion:

I have the Alpha+3 rules along with the original global rules from the box, and I need a little clarification:
If Germany takes the UK’s capital (i.e. London), can the US player then enter Quebec, claim it by putting his marker on it, adjust his IPC chart up by 2, and use the factory on his next turn?

Not unless Germany or Italy were to capture Quebec first.  Same reason Allies can’t take France’s territories once Paris is under Axis control.  However, if Axis takes over a French (or UK) territory and an Ally takes the territory away from them, THEN the Allied power can place their marker on it, earn income and use facilities.

One would wonder - if the Axis take Quebec, shouldn’t the allies surrender out of shear shame!  wink

Krieg, did your changes become official?  By that, I mean, did Larry endorse them and post them as official?  Not to undercut you, but he is the creator of the game and all.

To which changes are you referring?

@Krieghund:

To which changes are you referring?

Cow calls them version 3.9.  I understand you moved the German fleet and the British fleet around, maybe made some other changes.

They have been incorporated into Alpha 3.

It is the best version. Also I thought Krieghund’s changes was also met with LH imput as well, which is why we have the new AA gun rules.

Also it got incorporated September of last year… which is why I was surprised that Jen did not hear about it and still plays the older version of +3. In fact it stopped being referred to as 3.9 after it was incorporated and as +3.

No, the fleet move wasnt changed that long ago, I was still pretty darn active over there making sure Larry didnt sneak a change in on me.  Maybe January the fleet changes moved.  I’ve always liked the new AA Gun rules, it makes guns more valuable, less cost and more utilitarian.

@Cmdr:

No, the fleet move wasnt changed that long ago, I was still pretty darn active over there making sure Larry didnt sneak a change in on me.  Maybe January the fleet changes moved.  I’ve always liked the new AA Gun rules, it makes guns more valuable, less cost and more utilitarian.

The final changes were accepted early February.

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=7989&start=680

@Vance:

@Cmdr:

No, the fleet move wasnt changed that long ago, I was still pretty darn active over there making sure Larry didnt sneak a change in on me.  Maybe January the fleet changes moved.  I’ve always liked the new AA Gun rules, it makes guns more valuable, less cost and more utilitarian.

The final changes were accepted early February.

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=7989&start=680

Okay.  I see it on his page too, musta missed it first time through, but yea, basically, only the fleet changed?  (Some uniforms, but that’s it other than fleet?)

uk has 2 extra units and 5 aa guns… it is a big deal.

@Cow:

uk has 2 extra units and 5 aa guns… it is a big deal.

Yes.  So how does that impact the risk vs reward now?

And for that matter - may I be on record as saying - I don’t see the necessity of this move.  England can be liberated later.  Is there really such fanaticism in the community that we’re okay with Paris falling virtually without a fight, but we quell at the fall of London?  It could have happened in actual history.  If we were talking Moscow or Washington DC I’d be more inclined to go with the flow, but common, London was a shell.  Sure, it woulda cost the Germans a ton to take it - but then, it did in the game too!

Oh well.  Pissing into the wind, as my father used to say.

Anyway…I am not sure i like Alpha 3.9.  I need to play a few games of it first, but I’m inclined to toss it on the scrap heap of history with the amazingly bad OOB and Alpha 2 (yes I feel Alpha 2 was really bad - better than OOB, but not good like AAR, Classic or AA50!).  Course, maybe I’ll grow to like it.  Stranger things have happened!

You can still take london, I don’t know what you are complaining about. You just don’t want it to be a real battle for some reason.

I do not understand why you are making such a big deal of this. You said so yourself axis always won in the older version of alpha 3, so why would you play a game if you know how it turns out? So many people just chucked 6 inf into UK at the start of every game. You’re the only person who did not give allies a bid and you are the only person who is complaining about the axis in the updated version.

@Cmdr:

@Vance:

@Cmdr:

No, the fleet move wasnt changed that long ago, I was still pretty darn active over there making sure Larry didnt sneak a change in on me.�  Maybe January the fleet changes moved.�  I’ve always liked the new AA Gun rules, it makes guns more valuable, less cost and more utilitarian.

The final changes were accepted early February.

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=7989&start=680

Okay.  I see it on his page too, musta missed it first time through, but yea, basically, only the fleet changed?  (Some uniforms, but that’s it other than fleet?)

Fleet, +1 AA India, +some UK land

Attacking London only had a 7 IPC swing in Germany’s favor, after I weighed all the pro’s and con’s.  Now there are “2 extra ground units and 5 aa guns” if those units are just infantry, that swings the benefit to -13 (because they get 2 more hits and that means more fighter attacks on my people, means less hits for me, which means I lose higher IPC amounts.)

Even one more unit in there, just the extra AA Gun, would have made it closer to a zero sum game, and thus, not worth it.  I can get positive values from attacking Russia instead and focusing on Submarines/Fighters to keep England “honest.” Â

What I’m saying is that I feel it was an over reaction to London/Calcutta falling.  Either put another AA Gun in England OR put another Destroyer down by India.  But more ground units in England tips the scale so far it’s not worth attacking London.  I’m sure you can still win, in theory if I aimed a pistol at my foot and pulled the trigger, there would be a 1% chance of missing.  I’d rather not test that theory, and since I have great planes for the destruction of my homeland, I can just use those instead - Larry NEVER buffs Russia without a HUGE push by the community, so my planes there are perfectly safe.