Rules clarification again and again

And yes, I realize I made it only 3 votes, yet I gave four scenarios…I don’t know how to fix the vote number.  :oops:

The rule you are stating is only for offloading during non-combat phase (it means if your transport does anything during combat phase, it can’t do anything during non-combat phase)

During non-combat phase, Transports can go to any friendly or neutral sea zone, whatever the alliegence of the coastal territory(ies). Also in non-combat phase, transports can only offload in friendly territories.

It seems to me that the map for Spring 1942 is a considerable upgrade compared to the classic edition.  It allows for much more variation in strategy and is more accurate physically.  The exception to this is in North America, they just added central US worth 6 IPC’s (which makes sense… few games come down to tactical decisions in that area).

Anyway I’ve sketched a proposed alternate North America, and am considering rendering a full size replacement map to include the alteration.  I’d very much like to get some input from more experienced players before I spend the time and money creating the board.

The thing is I can’t figure out how to add the image to a post.  Describing it in text would be ineffective and maddening all around.  Please help!  I can email it.  But I understand that reasonable people might not want to open an attachment from a stranger.

It’s an attractive game board though. I’ve seen some of the original AA boards and they were hideous. I think it serves the purpose of getting people into the series well. We’ve added D-Day to the game list. The games get very heated and the players are very competitive, this last game was sort of a buzz kill because it was over in only 3 rounds and seemed too easy, I was convinced we must have been doing a lot of things wrong, and I think I’ve realized all of those things now. =)

Fighter escorts yes, Dardanelles no. Fighter escorts makes bombing campaigns more challenging than simply building fleets of bombers and sending them.

Regarding the Dardanelles rule it limits the options for nearly all powers in the Med:

Germany’s Med fleet is reduced to striking Africa. It can’t help pressuring the Russians on Caucasus or dealing with any incursions on Ukraine. Russia R1 tactic of building a submarine to sink the German fleet is removed (the only time on the entire series of games where the Russians can build ships!) The US cannot set a transport chain to reinforce Caucasus (rather a waste of resources but I’ve seen enough people trying it). Japan can’t threaten Caucasus with amphibious landings (which usually makes pressure on the Allies to close the Suez)

Since the game is considered already balanced by most players I disagree that having the rule goes towards balancing it, since I can’t see 1 side getting a big advantage by having it closed.

The main argument thus to use the rule is the historical situation but the game does not intend to fully reproduce History, I so guess it is mostly a matter of taste regarding playability/historical accuracy.

@Krieghund:

Moderator, please move this thread to the correct forum.

You can probably just delete it now, as the poster has reposted in the correct forum.  Thanks.

You can retreat from an attack regardless of how many moves your unit has left. It has been that way since Classic. It effectively adds 1 movement for the attackers but defending planes can also move 1 to land on a territory if their carrier has been sunk.

One of the best examples is for G to have a big tank stack on Caucasus and the Allies move a large force to Eastern Europe. You hit EE with units for G and the tanks from WR and afterwards you retreat back to Germany. And all of a sudden Germany gets a lot harder to take by the UK/US.

No.  You can’t load transports in a hostile sea zone.