AAG40 FAQ

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:

Ran into this one last night.  I looked through both Europe and Pacific books in regard to Neutrals.  Can fighters/tacs fly over a strict neutral during NCM.  Examples was UK Pacific fighters flying up to help defend Russia.  They can make it in the alloted moves in 1 turn if you can, if not it would take 2.

Actually, if you captured a strict or unfriendly neutral in the Conduct Combat phase, you would be able to fly over (but not into) it in noncombat movement, as it would then be friendly.  The rest of your answer is spot on.

wouldn’t it suffice, that aslong as you “Attacked” a strict neutral, you could fly over it?

And can’t you fly over a pro-opposite neutral anyways?  Like any other territory?

Air units may only fly over a strict or unfriendly neutral if they are attacking it.

@docfav7:

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:

There’s no reason to call it 100% finished as long as there are still ways people feel it can be improved and people are willing to do the work to improve it.  You could call it finished at any moment if you want, but doing so would only prevent [official] changes that are thought to be improvements to the game… otherwise they wouldn’t be considered for changes anyway.  When AAP40 was as old is Alpha+2 is now, people were still calling it just as balanced as people are calling Alpha+2… even “the most balanced of any AA game”.  but after many, many games they began to realize it was very unbalanced… even the least balanced of any AA game (at the time).  It takes a long time for the whole community to really explore all the potential strategies, but there is no reason it should be a matter of patience or whatever since the game is already out and you can play it as is for as long as you want.

@Krieghund:

Air units may only fly over a strict or unfriendly neutral if they are attacking it.

Can you clarify this? Do you mean to say that air units not involved in attacking the neutral territ can still fly over it if other units are attacking said territ?
I assume you don’t mean to imply that units can fly over in noncombat if units attacked the territ but didn’t capture it?

What I am getting at krieg, is that say you attack turkey with 1 inf and LOSE.  one can then fly over turkey on my NCM right?

@Stoney229:

Can you clarify this? Do you mean to say that air units not involved in attacking the neutral territ can still fly over it if other units are attacking said territ?

Not in combat movement.

@Stoney229:

I assume you don’t mean to imply that units can fly over in noncombat if units attacked the territ but didn’t capture it?

Yes, they can, because the territory is no longer neutral.

@Gargantua:

What I am getting at krieg, is that say you attack turkey with 1 inf and LOSE.  one can then fly over turkey on my NCM right?

Yes, because the territory is no longer neutral.

Questions…I know that the US cannot move into or through a sea zone occupied by japanese warships or where there is an island controlled by Japan before a DOW, but …1) If France falls on G1 can the US occupy a vacant FIC (if there are no UK/Anzac/Japanese forces already there) before it goes to war with Japan?.  2) Can the US move aircraft/troops/ships into any UK/Anzac held/occupied territory/sea zone if they (UK/Anzac) are not yet at war with Japan?  3) assuming the answers to both 1) and 2) are no, is it the case that the US is indeed strictly neutral at the start of the game and is basically restricted to building up/consolidating its forces in the Pacific prior to it going to war with Japan?  Many thanks.

@nimitz1:

Questions…I know that the US cannot move into or through a sea zone occupied by japanese warships or where there is an island controlled by Japan before a DOW, but …

I’m going to assume from this statement that we’re talking about Alpha+.2 here.  The only restriction in the Pacific on US ship movement is that they may not end their movement in sea zones adjacent to Japanese-controlled territories.  They may move through such sea zones as long as they don’t stop there.  They may also ignore Japanese warships.

@nimitz1:

1. If France falls on G1 can the US occupy a vacant FIC (if there are no UK/Anzac/Japanese forces already there) before it goes to war with Japan?.

Only if it’s at war with someone.  It doesn’t have to be Japan.

@nimitz1:

2. Can the US move aircraft/troops/ships into any UK/Anzac held/occupied territory/sea zone if they (UK/Anzac) are not yet at war with Japan?

Only if the US is at war with someone.

@nimitz1:

3. assuming the answers to both 1) and 2) are no, is it the case that the US is indeed strictly neutral at the start of the game and is basically restricted to building up/consolidating its forces in the Pacific prior to it going to war with Japan?

Yes.

Thanks Kreig,  just one more question, or rather confirmation for me regarding scrambled fighters…since they are scrambled for defence I take it they cannot retreat from a sea battle that is going badly?  thanks, mark.

That’s correct.