Three rules questions…

@AndrewAAGamer said in Global 1940 Rule Question re: scrambling and amphibious assaults:

@Panther said in Global 1940 Rule Question re: scrambling and amphibious assaults:

#3.
The American units only watch the scenery, as friendly powers never attack together. As Britain in your scenario is the attacker, the British transports may retreat, if possible.

In this scenario the transports were already in the SZ so they would not be allowed a retreat. However, if they left the SZ and came back in then they could retreat.

Right, that is the way that makes a retreat “possible”.

Locke888

Some people like simple some like complex….some like logic some like regimented rules

I agree with you…some are now calling it a National objective…I read it as non aggression pact in a political situation and that action is AGGRESSION. What I do know is I am not wrong…nor are people who agree with this move…this rule is simply left to interpretation…that’s all there is to it

No coincidence that there are so many house rules…why are they there? Because it is a great game and it has flaws and mistakes and rules that are not clear. I bet you there is not a player who plays this game who has not sat there and looked at a rule to go from section to section to get a clarification for at least 10 minutes during a game.

As for logic…if you are playing strategists…throw that out of the window…if you are playing historical folks…you can get somewhere…and then there is the in between and there you negotiate

Thank you all for the replies! I was the USSR and France in an Allied Victory. The Axis player waited to attack all of the major powers until round three and by that time we were too built up for him to push very far into one area.

Assuming that Japan and the US are not at war at that point in time, Japan can indeed do that.

@Soson:

@Krieghund:

It’s the same in Alpha 3 (as well as every other version of AA40) - original control is indicated by the emblem on the territory, not by who controls it at the beginning of the game.

Thanks, I’m glad to know it is working as intended.  The computer game just shows color, so I’m not sure what you mean by emblem.  Maybe the cardboard game is different.

Open up the territory tap and hover your mouse over a territory. If should give you information about the original owner of that territory.

Do this to Kiangsu, you can see it is not an original Japanese territory, but an Chinese one.

The current rule is (Pacific rules, page 16): If an Allied player attacks Japanese units in or declares an amphibious assault from one of these sea zones, the Japanese player can announce at the beginning of this phase that he or she intends to launch one or more kamikaze strikes in that sea zone.  They are resolved before any combat begins.

So the status of any land territories adjacent to the kamikaze sea zones has no relevance.

@Omega:

When one scramble for defense, can you decide to back after one round of fire? (as the defender_

Urgent, we stopped playing -.-

Asked and answered in the FAQ thread.

You cannot retreat as the defender for any reason.

@Dijitz:

So no’s would be kept track of via web board?

Alpha+.2 is still only in the Alpha stage (see Alpha vs Beta w/Google).

With changes quickly happening, the people who work on this will let a final tested ruleset come out first, then complete ABattleMap.

Until then, help to test Alpha+.2 and join all the controversy that there is.  :-)