AA50 Rules Errata and Q+A

@Krieghund:

@TexCapPrezJimmy:

2. 1 Sub vs. 1 Sub: How the heck does this work.

… If not, the attacker fires.  If he/she hits, the battle is over.  If not, the defender fires.  If he/she hits, the battle is over. …

I’m completely confused now. On page 30 of the rulebook is stated “If both players have submarines, all the submarines get to fire a surprise strike before taking casualities”.

So up to now I interpreted this as follows: If as well attacker as defender decide not to submerge, both fire their surprise strike “at the same time”. So why should the defender in this 1 Sub vs. 1 Sub situation take his sub as casuality before firing his surprise strike? Am I wrong?

You’re right.  I don’t know what I was thinking!  :-o

I’ll fix it.

@TexCapPrezJimmy:

@J2004823:

Remember the flowchart I did before?

Maybe also add “attacker retreat” as a full box, with explanation of what is permitted and what is not permitted? Unless this is more detail then you intended with the flow chart.

Thanks for your suggestion.

My aim was to create a game aid to regulate the flow of a combat. The initial motivation was to solve many confusions around submarines’ surprise attack and destroyer’s anti-sub ability. However, I encountered another problem when I was trying to map Step 5. Press Attack or Retreat into my flowchart. Step 5. Press Attack or Retreat (rulebook p.9) has been designed as a conditional loop. Nevertheless, these two conditions are not equal. Condition A is purely a condition, whereas Condition B involves retreat resolving. Therefore, I chose to restructure the flow: splitting Step 5 into mutiple condition checks, combining retreat resolving into Step 6. Since the combat is over once the attacker decides to retreat, there is nothing illogical to merge retreat resolving into Step 6. Conclude Combat. It is the best compromise I can think of.

To accommodate your suggestion, simply detail Step 6. Conclude Combat will do. However, as you mentioned, Step 6 has more things than my original flowchart can catch. As simple as caputring a territory may involve capturing, liberating, capital liberating, capital occupied by enemy, exchanging vitory city token, or achieving/failing national objectives. I will need a new flowchart to list all these possible outcomes.

if the uk takes france does the usa get to place a bonus no marker in france as well?

There are no NO markers, but the US does get the bonus.

So if France falls, BOTH England AND America get the NO?  I thought it was either or!

nah, it says if ‘allies’ control. so the bonus is for all of them that have it mentioned in their NO’s

1. Is the “limit of 3 chinese unit rule” consider a) when determining how many units are created (purchased) b) after combat phase or c) after non-combat phase? (I think not answered, but I may be mistaken.)

2. In the 1942 setup, are the initial control markers permanent or is the original controller considered the paint on the board? (already answered, but answer was contrary to what I read in the rulebook.)

3. If you liberate a territory of an ally, whose capital is captured, you gain those points and can build in any factories that are in that territory, up until the ally capital is liberated, in which case the ally regains control. But what about just moving into a territory of an ally, whose capital is captured, where that territory has never been captured by an enemy. In other words, in order to gain IPC and be able to build in an ally territory, do you need to re-capture it or can you just move into it?

@TexCapPrezJimmy:

1. Is the “limit of 3 chinese unit rule” consider a) when determining how many units are created (purchased) b) after combat phase or c) after non-combat phase? (I think not answered, but I may be mistaken.)

It affects only the placement of new units in the Mobilize Units phase.

@TexCapPrezJimmy:

2. In the 1942 setup, are the initial control markers permanent or is the original controller considered the paint on the board? (already answered, but answer was contrary to what I read in the rulebook.)

Per the FAQ, the original controller of a territory is considered to be the controller printed on the map, regardless of the scenario being played.  China is considered to be the original controller of Manchuria and Kiangsu.

@TexCapPrezJimmy:

3. If you liberate a territory of an ally, whose capital is captured, you gain those points and can build in any factories that are in that territory, up until the ally capital is liberated, in which case the ally regains control. But what about just moving into a territory of an ally, whose capital is captured, where that territory has never been captured by an enemy. In other words, in order to gain IPC and be able to build in an ally territory, do you need to re-capture it or can you just move into it?

If it still belongs to your ally, you can’t capture it.  It remains his/hers until it’s captured by the enemy.  You can only gain control of it by capturing it from the enemy while your ally’s capital is in enemy hands.

Krieg I think his 2nd question referred to all the UK territories in the Pacific that Japan starts out with in the '42 scenario.

@Imperious:

as far as the first strike option the rules say its on the first round ONLY.

Was this changed?

It appears the Errata (top of page 3) changed this to "Submarines get a suprise first strike in every round of combat in which no enemy destroyers are present.

http://www.wizards.com/AvalonHill/rules/AxAl-AnEd_Errata.pdf

Can anyone confirm?

This seems to completely override/overrule the rulebook.

Can a transport offload onto two different territories that share the same sea zone? the rule seems ambiguous.

@wileyone:

@Imperious:

as far as the first strike option the rules say its on the first round ONLY.

Was this changed?

It appears the Errata (top of page 3) changed this to "Submarines get a suprise first strike in every round of combat in which no enemy destroyers are present.

http://www.wizards.com/AvalonHill/rules/AxAl-AnEd_Errata.pdf

Can anyone confirm?

This seems to completely override/overrule the rulebook.

The intent of the “only happens once” in the rulebook was that if a sub gets a surprise strike it doesn’t get to fire again when the rest of the units fire later in the round.  The wording does make it sound as though surprise strikes only occur in the first combat round, so it was clarified in the FAQ.

@Heavy:

Can a transport offload onto two different territories that share the same sea zone? the rule seems ambiguous.

No.  From page 31:

A transport cannot offload in two territories during a single turn,

thanks mr K  8-)

subs
it says they can submerge instead of fire without a DD present, this is why planes can’t attack them alone. But do they HAVE to submerge? Say you hit my fleet with air, can I leave my subs on the surface to soak hits for my CA,BB,CV’s?

No. Air unit hits can never be assigned to subs unless there is a destroyer friendly to the air unit(s) in the battle.

I’m a bit confused, I know China and America go back to back, but technically, which goes first?  If simultaneously, then why cannot American and Chinese forces fight together?

If not at the exact same time, can China go, then America go so America can have a valid landing zone in China?

China and the US take their turns at the same time, but China must complete its Combat Movement and Conduct Combat phases before the US begins its Combat Movement phase, or vice versa.  Either one can perform these phases first, and it can vary from turn to turn.  Since their turns are simultaneous otherwise, and both powers conduct noncombat movement at the same time, US planes can’t land in territories that were captured by China during the current turn.

Bummer.  It wouldnt come into play often, only when Japan gets really F’ed up by China resulting in a China with some units, but it woulda been nice if America/China could elect to go first and then the other go.  It would open up some nice possibilities!