AAG40 FAQ

Can i scramble a fighter to defend a lone transport against an air attack?

I want to make an amphibious assault an TT A, but have to move from TT B over TT C to get there. In TT C is an enemy warship
which i attack the same round with other units from TT D. Is the transport allowed to move through?

In other words:
A transport has to stop an amphibious assault when it encounters an other enemy warship on its way there, even when there is another planned battle right? And it cannot move on afterwards?

Thanks for the quick answer!

@Krieghund:

Ships that begin their turn in a hostile sea zone always have the choice of moving away or fighting.  The transports may move to a friendly sea zone, load units, then move back to either their original sea zone or another one to make an amphibious assault.

In addition, in the same turn that war is declared, transports may actually load in the sea zone in which they begin the turn even if it is hostile.  This exemption applies only in the combat move phase in war is declared and only in the transports’ starting sea zone.  In your example, this would mean that Germany could actually load the transports in the same sea zone with the Soviet battleship.

That’s very interesting, I had thought they couldn’t load after declaring war and making the sea zone hostile.  I’ll keep that in mind, could have used it earlier.  Thanks Kreig.

I apologize if this has been asked, there are 65 pages at the time of this post.

In the Pacific rules, only Anzac and India can take over Dutch territories. The US can only control them if they liberate them from an axis player.

Given that the Europe board is treated separately in some cases: Can the US take control of Suriname (North of Brazil borders sea zone 88) as a non combat move, or is the rule the same in that only UK or Anzac can? I am looking for an alternate naval base site should London fall prior to the Gibraltar base being knocked out.

This site has limited use, but it does permit (with a naval base) staging for attacks on London, Scotland, Normandy, Belgium, and (if allies have the straight) South France, Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria while remaining out of range of most axis air units not staged in Gibraltar. I suppose it also gives you range to reach French Equatorial Africa and other western African zones.

I imagine UK could just build one in British Guiana since it is out of range of bombers and non carrier based tactical bombers.

The same rules apply to Dutch territories in the global game as in the Pacific game.  The US may not take control of them except by recapturing them from the Axis.

@Krieghund:

The same rules apply to Dutch territories in the global game as in the Pacific game.  The US may not take control of them except by recapturing them from the Axis.

Hi Kevin, considering the neutrality of US with the consequences that US may not take Dutch territories except when taken by Axis, why don’t apply the same rule for Anzac and United Kingdom considering their neutrality towards Japan and the Alliance towards Dutch (although the Dutch capital is occupied by German forces)?

If UK invades French Morocco, the Morocco remains French if before it isn’t occupied by Axis. Why in global we have the exception of Dutch territories? In my opinion this rule is too favourable for Allies and penalizing the Japan because the Allies grow too fast.

Unlike the US, UK/ANZAC is not completely neutral.  They are at war with Germany and Italy.  UK/ANZAC is protecting Dutch interests in the Pacific for the Dutch government in exile in London.  Since Japan is allied with Germany and Italy, UK/ANZAC will not allow Japan to invade Dutch territories.  In addition, Japanese expansion would threaten UK/ANZAC holdings in the Pacific.

@Emperor:

@Krieghund:

Ships that begin their turn in a hostile sea zone always have the choice of moving away or fighting.  The transports may move to a friendly sea zone, load units, then move back to either their original sea zone or another one to make an amphibious assault.

In addition, in the same turn that war is declared, transports may actually load in the sea zone in which they begin the turn even if it is hostile.  This exemption applies only in the combat move phase in war is declared and only in the transports’ starting sea zone.  In your example, this would mean that Germany could actually load the transports in the same sea zone with the Soviet battleship.

That’s very interesting, I had thought they couldn’t load after declaring war and making the sea zone hostile.  I’ll keep that in mind, could have used it earlier.  Thanks Kreig.

More like using it against you.  Your favorite tactic is to lock transports by building units into their zone.  :roll:

I was just reading all the new Alpha 2 rules in prep for a game tonight.  One thing I thought was a rule I couldn’t find again is,

1.)  Transports of a Neutral cannot end movement with units on board, is that correct?

It is no longer a rule.  The new restrictions on US ship movement while neutral made it unnecessary.

Is Alpha 2 finished? Where can i find it?

It is not finished.  It can be found here.

I thought the Alpha+2 were the final?  Please, no more changes.  Or if you are, please make them the final or don’t post until they are.  This is getting too much.

Again, there is a testing process that is going on here that many of us are participating in and are thankful for that opportunity. We understand that many rules/setup changes are not for everyone. So if you find a version that you like, feel free to use those until a “final version” is released. No one is forcing you to use every change as the process goes along. Please don’t ask for the process to stop though. Many of us have put in a lot of time and hard work for this project to be a success. These are necessary steps to accomplish our goal. Most changes are handled in a separate thread here so as not to confuse the changes with OOB rules.

I agree with all that you said and a bunch of people agree with you as well and I do appreciate all the work that goes into it.

My only point is that a lot of this should have been done before hand.  OR……  Let’s not keep posting new setups and wait for one that works.  With the latest Alpha +2 setup, I can’t really see what needs to be improved.  What are you guys looking at?  This is a great set up.  I personally just think if any more setups are posted, it should be the FINAL one.  That’s all I’m saying.

Thanks and I’ll be quiet now.  (for a little while)… :lol:

The Alpha project is a “public playtest”.  This means that anyone can test the rules and setup and report their results.  Under these circumstances, it would be unreasonable to expect any feedback if we don’t post the latest changes.  :-)

As Variable and Gamerman01 said, if you don’t want to be subjected to the chaos of the process, just tune it out and play by the box rules (with the official clarifications).  We’ll let you know when Alpha is finalized.  At that time, you can decide which version you prefer.

I hope I didn’t come across too much like bitching.  I love the work you guys are doing.  I’ve put in my 2 cents when I thought it deemed it.  Keep it up.

But let’s finish…… :wink: