Alpha 2 Rules Question

@ShadowHAwk:

@wittmann:

1. Yes.
2. Yes. Each scrambling Fighter would get one roll of 4 to hit and sink one TT, with its cargo onboard. On the next turn the attacker could retreat any surviving Transports. (Or stay and try an be sunk again, naturally,)
3. A Sub is ignored, unless a Scramble happens, then it is in the fight.
You did realise, however, that a Sub forbids an amphibious assault, if the Transport(s) is not escorted?

Where is that rule in the book? I heared from it but in my game this weekend i could not find it.

Thought that transports can only ignore subs if they got a warship sailing with them.

See the rulebook:
@rulebook:

Transports
….
However, a transport is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy submarines unless at least 1 warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.

So the requirement of an escorting warship applies to the ability to unload troops (not to ignore a submarine).

HTH :-)

@theROCmonster:

I recommend playing the newest alpha. The new alpha rules allow scrambling from not island airbases as well, which I believe is huge. The entire flavor of the game is changed with the new alpha rules VS out of box. Also out of Box I think UK just falls to sea lion everytime…

theROCmonster, he is playing the G40 2nd edition (recently released). The OOB rules include the the newest Alpha (nicknamed Alpha 3.9) with the couple changes Port Hardcore mentioned. I guess you could call OOB 2nd edition Alpha+4, or the final Alpha.

I would go OOB 2nd edition instead of Alpha+3.9, like kcdzim said. The changes between the two were minor compared to the changes that took place through the Alpha project (like the scramble rules from Alpha+1 allowing all airbases to scramble, but only 3 units). 1 UK inf missing in Egypt surprised many ppl thinking the game is axis bias, but like he said it probably balances the Med which is a battle with-in the war. Adding Korea to the Nap just makes sense.

What I would do is play OOB 2nd ED a few times, and decide for yourself which side has an edge (every group is different), keeping in mind that the allies have a longer learning curve and it normally takes a few games for them to figure things out. If in the first game you lose Moscow in turn 6-7, then figure out what the allies need to do to save/delay that in the next game. I would also plan for a two day game the first time LOL (2-10 hour sessions).

@BigBadBruce:

You mean you typed a set of rules with OOB rules and this link?
http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4167

My group and I never play the Europe or Pacific games on their own, just together as Global. We became constantly frustrated when reffering to 2 different manuals for a rule clarification, not to mention a print out of the latest Alpha modifications. So, I began a cut and paste project that combined both manuals, while adding and deleteing changes made after Alpha+2. Even though I am giving away copies of my document, I can’t post it here due to copy right issues.

I’ll SBR just about whenver possible.  The risk/reward is now in my favor.  So unless I can get more than 3 IPC for using my bomber elsewhere, I’ll use it to SBR (if I can.)

Why:  Average Cost: 2 IPC; Average Damage: 4 IPC, net 2 IPC, if I can get an extra infantry, it’s better for me, otherwise, bombing is a good alternative to parking.

Surrender isnt part of our vocabulary,  correct me if I’m wrong in alpha2 when London falls that brings the US into the war,      so why not fight    or just give it away  I game for the battles (Kursk) = big tank battles between Germany and Russia or (truk Lagoon) big naval battles between Japan and USA  or the Battle of Britain/Sealion.    and I like to win , to add or change the rules can be fun but this game was not designed to be redesigned by all of us, It’s a step up from the Anniversary edition.  If because the Axis won the last 4 games means the Allies cant win , then I think you may be missing some thing but I dont think so from what I can tell the people on the forum are skilled, experienced players.    There are a bunch of people who think the game is unbalanced with the Allies being the one with the upper hand. This subject might get ya to think that it is balanced the other way.  In 25+ yrs I’ve seen where one side will get a bunch of wins only to be offset by the other,  overall I would say that the score is about 50/50  we play on average 2 games a weekend.    How did Hitler say it……fight to the last man  I think Stalin said it to… Keep gaming and post the results.

Thanks for trying them out, and PLEASE help me correct the errors that you find!  Just post them here or on BGG and I’ll upload new versions as soon as they are fixed.

Also, I like the idea of adding in a sheet or two summarizing some of the rules changes to submarines, SBR, etc.  I plan on doing this.  Have any suggestions of things that should be covered, let me know.

Also, keep in mind the NO descriptions are meant to be reminders, not an exhaustive description.  They should be helpful but may not explain everything needed due to space constraints.  However, if you are finding any of them misleading then let me know.

EDIT:  Ok I did a check and found a couple major errors, my sincere apologies to anyone who printed these!  I have taken down the file and submitted a new one that I believe is 100% accurate, its waiting for approval.

EDIT:  February 3, ok new files have been approved and are available at the link above.

thanks krieg. my head was starting to hurt

the 2 extra infantry does not appear on the list of national objectives and bonus income on page 23
i assume that page lists the NO’s for europe, since japan is not on the list.

for sovjet union it only says:

+5 ipc if there are no axis warship on seazone 125, SU controls archangel and no other allies present on SU ground
+3 for any original german territory and sovjet controls its own.