There also seem to be one less tac bomber in w germany even tho it is not marked as a change. If its not removed the 2 BB:s could both be good attacks even with scrambles. I cant see the point in removing this tbh, maybe just a missprint or might be to compensate for upgraded italian bomber.
The US should be able to defend sea zones south and west of Iceland against all threats. That was a US/UK agreement in WWII that allowed the UK to concentrate East of Iceland.
Other than one game, where i was the culprit with good reason (And the US was already in the war) why would anyone attack Iceland?
Naval attacks in the SZ south and west of Iceland. The US took on that responsibility after a transport with US citizens was sunk by a German sub.
Great discussion!
What’s to deter Russia from attacking Japan? Nothing.
I don’t like the NO for US/UK in Paris. If the US and UK are in Paris after war has been going on for several turns, I concede as Germany. The NO is pointless.
How do the Axis have the advantage in Alpha + 2? Sorry but I’m not seeing it.
Those 11 inf, big IC at Berlin plus 6 inf at Rome … and UK losing the option of sinking italian boats. But the first is the bigger, skyrocketing Germany to Leningrad
After a closer review of the possibilities I’m more eager to playtest Alpha+.3.
Nevertheless I don’t understand the Mongolia rule. As I understand it the Russians can attack Japan R4 any time and still Japan cannot attack Amur from Korea\Manchuria? But when Russia pulls back, Japan could land with a Transport there and NCM everything up? Or they could attack from Siberia without provoking the Mogols? And what about the Planes? Are only the ones in Man\Kor not allowed to attack?
I’d really wish for a clarification from Krieghund and\or Larry.
I also don’t understand why the Caucasus oil is now nothing worth for Italy, and I take the loss of the German Tac for a mistake.
IMO the Italian DD and TT in 96 is a free gift for the Brits since they can perfectly hide under their scramblers on Malta and now can even easily take out the Tobruk or Libya forces.
The AA rule is interesting even thou I don’t like that Sealion is no longer an option. This changes the G1 purchases since the Brits no longer need to be really afraid of a G2\G3 landing.
As I understand it the Russians can attack Japan R4 any time and still Japan cannot attack Amur from Korea\Manchuria?
Russians can attack in the East from the beginning of the game. R4 is only applicable to attacking Italy/Germany.
Nevertheless I don’t understand the Mongolia rule. As I understand it the Russians can attack Japan R4 any time and still Japan cannot attack Amur from Korea\Manchuria? But when Russia pulls back, Japan could land with a Transport there and NCM everything up? Or they could attack from Siberia without provoking the Mogols? And what about the Planes? Are only the ones in Man\Kor not allowed to attack?
I’d really wish for a clarification from Krieghund and\or Larry.
Then you need to message them, or get on Larry’s board. I think I understand the NAP rules, but it sounds like only Larry or Krieg are good enough for you.
How do the Axis have the advantage in Alpha + 2? Sorry but I’m not seeing it.
Those 11 inf, big IC at Berlin plus 6 inf at Rome … and UK losing the option of sinking italian boats. But the first is the bigger, skyrocketing Germany to Leningrad
Pretty sure the vast majority of us see the Allies as advantaged in Alpha 2, Func.
Doesn’t sound like you spent enough money lobbying for changes in China, either. :-)
What’s to deter Russia from attacking Japan? Nothing.
Well, Larry has faith in the players that they’ll “work out a treaty” :lol:
I don’t like the NO for US/UK in Paris. If the US and UK are in Paris after war has been going on for several turns, I concede as Germany. The NO is pointless.
Almost. But what if you or your opponent is/are trying to get the 6 cities in the Pacific, and you/they need control of Berlin to pull off the win? Then this NO is not pointless at all.
OMG, what have they done to my beloved sealion. You wouldn’t have guessed that it needed set backs considering how hard I’ve had to defend this strategy.
I don’t necessarily need Krieg or Larry, if you can explain it to me…
I just don’t get the point.
I think the US NO for the Europe map would be better served in Africa.
I don’t necessarily need Krieg or Larry, if you can explain it to me…
I just don’t get the point.
Oh, OK, great, I think I can explain. Just a sec…
I think the US NO for the Europe map would be better served in Africa.
I see it as more of an incentive to go after liberating Paris. But perhaps one in Africa could work better to get the US to want to be involved in Europe.
I really don’t like all the rule changes in AAG40. I mean changing a setup to balance things is one thing. But to completely rework the rules is something that is better done in another game (maybe scrambling was ok, because that was needed, but the new AA thing shouldn’t change within a game.
Nevertheless I don’t understand the Mongolia rule. As I understand it the Russians can attack Japan R4 any time and still Japan cannot attack Amur from Korea\Manchuria?
Yes. Barring an oral “gentleman’s agreement” (that is made to be broken), Russia can attack Japan at any time, including R1. Japan can attack Amur from Korea/Manchuria, but then Mongolia all becomes Russian.
But when Russia pulls back
I’m not so sure Russia will want to pull back, to prevent blow by over the North by Japan.
Japan could land with a Transport there and NCM everything up?
Yes. And this is another reason Russia might not pull back from Amur.
Or they could attack from Siberia without provoking the Mogols?
Yes.
And what about the Planes? Are only the ones in Man\Kor not allowed to attack?
That’s a good question. I would predict that it’s only the ground forces, so if you amphibious assault Amur, planes from Man/Kor could join. After all, you could fly them out to sea and back… I dunno, that’s a good question.
But yeah, as Russia I leave forces in Amur so that Japan can’t take over all of Eastern Russia without incurring the wrath of the Mongolians, and so that Japan can’t waltz past Amur to the north.
I just don’t get the point.
I don’t either. Another loophole-ridden rule that gives incentives for situations that make little sense (like invading Amur from anywhere but the South, and the Mongolians are cool with it?)… At least Alpha2 rule was cleaner…
Thanks Gamerman01, thats what I thought too.
Whatever, guess we’ll have to test it.
