AAG40 FAQ

I was recently informed that in Pacfic40, declaring the intention to convoy is a condition for convoy damage.

Does convoy damage work this way in Global?  Can I choose not to convoy my opponents even if they want to lose IPC to convoy damage?

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”.

@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).

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.