AA50 Rules Errata and Q+A

SUB QUESTIONS

1)Can a sub move freely through a sea zone consisting of only an enemy sub, and ignore it the same way other ships can?

a)If you have a sub on sub only battle do both sides get to fire?
b)Consider there is no destroyer present for the attacker can the defending sub just choose to submerge instead of being attacked?
c)Consider the defending sub has no friendly destroyer can the attacking sub choose to submerge or retreat into an adjacent territory after it chose to attack?

a)If a sub and a destroyer are attacking a sea zone with only an enemy sub does the attacking sub get a surprise attack where the defending sun cannot fire back if it is hit?
b)What if it the reverse and the sub only is attacking a sea zone with a sub and destroyer, what is the procedure then?

4)Lets say 2 subs attack a battleship only and both hit, the battleship cannot fire back correct? If it was only one sub firing and hit then the battleship gets to fire back correct?

AC question
Lets say your Japanese fleet attacks an american fleet in sea zone 12. In that battle you end up losing your only aircraft carrier. Now either winning the battle or retreating can your planes land in axis controlled Algeria?

Thanks 4 the help  :-)

@514bishy:

SUB QUESTIONS

1)Can a sub move freely through a sea zone consisting of only an enemy sub, and ignore it the same way other ships can?

Yes.

a)If you have a sub on sub only battle do both sides get to fire?

Yes.  But if the defender chooses to submerge immediately, then no shots will be fired at all.

b)Consider there is no destroyer present for the attacker can the defending sub just choose to submerge instead of being attacked?

Right.

c)Consider the defending sub has no friendly destroyer can the attacking sub choose to submerge or retreat into an adjacent territory after it chose to attack?

Yes.  Although remember the “attacking” sub may choose to simply ignore the defending sub in the first place.  Or, if neither submerges before the first round, the attacker or defender may choose to submerge at any time (but not between attacker and defender die rolls - they will always roll the same number of times)

a)If a sub and a destroyer are attacking a sea zone with only an enemy sub does the attacking sub get a surprise attack where the defending sun cannot fire back if it is hit?

That’s right, this is a deadly combination.  You should roll the attacking sub and destroyer separately because of this.  If the SUB hits, the defending sub does not get to fire back, that’s right.

b)What if it the reverse and the sub only is attacking a sea zone with a sub and destroyer, what is the procedure then?

Defending sub gets a surprise strike every round.  It rolls first every round, and if it rolls a 1, the attacking sub is sunk without getting a chance to fire.  But if the attacking sub hits and if the defender were to lose the destroyer first, then you would have a sub on sub battle as in #2 above.

4)Lets say 2 subs attack a battleship only and both hit, the battleship cannot fire back correct?

Correct.

If it was only one sub firing and hit then the battleship gets to fire back correct?

Correct.  The ability of the battleship to soak a hit effectively nullifies 1 sub surprise strike hit.

AC question
Lets say your Japanese fleet attacks an american fleet in sea zone 12. In that battle you end up losing your only aircraft carrier. Now either winning the battle or retreating can your planes land in axis controlled Algeria?

The Japanese planes have to have movement points remaining either way.  If a plane flew 4 spaces to get to Z12 and the carrier is sunk, those planes that have no movement points remaining will splash.  If planes only flew 3 or less spaces to get to Z12, they can definitely land in Axis controlled Algeria (if controlled by Axis before this Japanese turn started) after either a retreat or a victory, yes.

Amazing thx Gamerman!!

Okay here’s a couple more AC question:

a) A fighter can attack a seazone on its 4th move and land in that seazone on a friendly AC correct? (presuming it won the battle of course)
b) What if both fighter and AC want to retreat? Can they both move back into an adjacent seazone? And does that seazone have to be where they came from like on land?

Lets say a japanese fighter is defending with its AC in Z12 and in the battle it loses its AC. Can it then land in Algeria if it is controlled by the Axis?

Land retreating questions
a) Lets say german forces attack russian forces in east poland from western poland and baltic states. If germany wants to retreat do they have to move all together into either west poland or baltic states.
b) Lets go with the same scenario but germany is only attacking from baltic states and control west poland. Can they retreat to west poland?

@514bishy:

a) A fighter can attack a seazone on its 4th move and land in that seazone on a friendly AC correct? (presuming it won the battle of course)

Yes, and the aircraft carrier does not HAVE TO be sent there on the combat move - it just has to be within 2 spaces and COULD move in during noncombat.

b) What if both fighter and AC want to retreat? Can they both move back into an adjacent seazone? And does that seazone have to be where they came from like on land?

Boats retreat like land units - all have to go back together to a zone one of them came from.  Air is different - they have to have the movement points, but can go wherever they want in noncom if they have the movement left.

Lets say a japanese fighter is defending with its AC in Z12 and in the battle it loses its AC. Can it then land in Algeria if it is controlled by the Axis?

Yes.  Note that you were asking about attacking in b) above.  If a carrier is lost by a defender, the aircraft aboard it can move 1 space to a safe landing zone.  This could include a DIFFERENT carrier one sea zone away, in any direction.

Land retreating questions
a) Lets say german forces attack russian forces in east poland from western poland and baltic states. If germany wants to retreat do they have to move all together into either west poland or baltic states.

Right.  All LAND forces.  Air units can go anywhere according to normal restrictions.

b) Lets go with the same scenario but germany is only attacking from baltic states and control west poland. Can they retreat to west poland?

No.  But if they have a tank in Baltic states, they need to state that a tank is moving through friendly Poland, thus establishing another retreat route.

You play the 1942 scenario, right? It is not uncommon on J1 to attack Z53 with the fighter from Japan. This is 4 movement points.  The Japanese player will take off this fighter first if hit, and then the carrier no longer has to move to Z53. (This would be what the Japanese player is hoping for, because the carrier is dead meat if it has to go to Z53) If the Americans don’t score any hits, then the Japanese player MUST move a carrier into Z53 to catch this plane. These rules are fairly clear in the rulebook… Do you have a rulebook?

Note that in the example above, it is illegal to attack anywhere other than Z53 with the carrier in Z51, because it would then be impossible for the carrier to catch the fighter in Z53.  There has to be a possible way for the fighter to land safely if it survives, no matter what the odds are.

I do have the rule book but I am really enjoying clarifying things because sometimes the scenarios are so different and the rules can be a little confusing although most are pretty straight forward.

-When you are declaring your attack with a plane you must declare where it will land correct? And even if it is retreating it must continue that path correct?
-If the destination path was on an AC that has been sunk in battle and the fighter still has a move left, that’s when it can retreat to an adjacent territory correct? -What if it had 2 moves left, can it retreat 2 moves away or still one friendly adjacent territory?

In your example above the/an AC is the only ship that can enter Z53 in non combat correct? (basically the only ship that can enter a seazone after there was an attack made in that sea zone)

Sorry if it sounds like Im repeating myself or what u said. I just like to be 100% :oops:
thx again

@514bishy:

I do have the rule book but I am really enjoying clarifying things because sometimes the scenarios are so different and the rules can be a little confusing although most are pretty straight forward.

OK, thanks, that helps.  Then I can refer to page numbers for you.  And I understand the need for clarification and am happy to help

-When you are declaring your attack with a plane you must declare where it will land correct? And even if it is retreating it must continue that path correct?

No.  You never have to declare paths with planes and never declare where it will land.  You land it when the time comes (noncombat movement).

-If the destination path was on an AC that has been sunk in battle and the fighter still has a move left, that’s when it can retreat to an adjacent territory correct?

Right.

-What if it had 2 moves left, can it retreat 2 moves away or still one friendly adjacent territory?

Two.  Planes don’t really “retreat”, they disengage.  They do not retreat like land and naval units do.

Sorry if it sounds like Im repeating myself or what u said. I just like to be 100% :oops:
thx again

Understood, and you’re most welcome.  Keep 'em coming

@Gamerman01:

@514bishy:

-When you are declaring your attack with a plane you must declare where it will land correct? And even if it is retreating it must continue that path correct?

No.  You never have to declare paths with planes and never declare where it will land.  You land it when the time comes (noncombat movement).

To be clear, you do have to demonstrate that there is at least one place where your plane can land when you attack with it.  However, if there are multiple places, you don’t have to pick one until noncombat movement.

Right.

Experienced players can always see whether it is possible to land all the planes, so these declarations are never necessary when your opponent is experienced, because he can see whether or not the move is legal without you explaining it…  I’ve played dozens and dozens of games online without a single aircraft move having to be explained.

Wow guys thats huge. Feel like such a noob  :oops:

So when a plane is 'disengaging" from an attack it can land anywhere it wants (friendly territory or AC of course) according to how many moves it has left?

Now lets say in Europe where Germany is attacking a territory with its 5 planes, when it is time for non combat, it is a matter of remembering where your planes came from to know how many moves each one has left correct?
I believe, if my memory serves me well, that in the revised edition they had markers available to either indicate how many moves it took for that plane to get to the attacked territory or to indicate how many moves that plane had left. This seems handy in this case where you have many planes attacking a single territory but otherwise its all memory I guess right?

Yes, that’s correct.  Many people make their own markers or use tiny dice to indicate how many moves remain for each plane.  Of course, if you have to take a plane as a casualty, you’ll always want to take the one that travelled furthest to the battle in order to gain the most flexibility in noncombat movement, all other things being equal.

I use coins.  Pennies to denote 1 MP remaining, Nickels for 2, Dimes for 3, Quarters for 4…  I put the fighters and bombers on top of the appropriate coin
You could use country markers or something, alternatively
Where they came from becomes irrelevant - you just need to know how many movement is left for each plane

I think I still have revised :-o

More questions

1. Land units attacking from an amphibious assault cannot retreat correct?

2. All warships entering an enemy seazone must participate in the attack together and cannot do other objectives correct? (such as a bombardment)

3. During non combat, can you move an AA gun into a newly controlled territory that you captured in the same round?

4. For the paratrooper breakthrough, is the bomber restricted to attack only the territory it is dropping the infantry in? Or can it drop the infantry into the first hostile territory it goes over and continue to attack another territory?

@514bishy:

I think I still have revised :-o

More questions

1. Land units attacking from an amphibious assault cannot retreat correct?

Correct, but you can separate them from and land units coming from overland (not by transport) and they can retreat separately (but air must break off at the same time)

2. All warships entering an enemy seazone must participate in the attack together and cannot do other objectives correct? (such as a bombardment)

Right, if you are attacking any ships, even submarines or transports, no bombardment can take place in that sea zone that turn.

3. During non combat, can you move an AA gun into a newly controlled territory that you captured in the same round?

Yes

4. For the paratrooper breakthrough, is the bomber restricted to attack only the territory it is dropping the infantry in?

Yes

Or can it drop the infantry into the first hostile territory it goes over and continue to attack another territory?

No

What is not considered a surface warship?

514bishy: A Transport and a Sub.

thx wittmann, thats what I thought but wanted to be sure.

I am very new to this forum so please forgive me when  ask what are bids and how do they work?

Thx again guys for your help with all my questins  :-D

@514bishy:

I am very new to this forum so please forgive me when  ask what are bids and how do they work?

Bids serve 3 purposes (off the top of my head)

The players bid auction style, for which side they will take.  For example, I’ll offer to take the Allies at 10, which means you will spot me 10 IPC’s worth of units which I can place on the starting board, possibly with certain restrictions.
But you don’t want to give me that much so you bid the Allies at 9.  Now if I don’t lower your bid, you will have the Allies with 9 IPC’s worth of units to start.  So of course this continues until one player is unwilling to bid lower.

The 3 purposes served:

1. A great way to determine sides (as opposed to rolling dice or fighting over it).  It’s great because neither player can argue that they had the weaker side - both players are essentially agreeing to the same terms using the bid.
2. Helps balance unbalanced games.

For example, in 1941 with no optional rules in play, the Allies are at a severe disadvantage with the Box setup.  The Allies will win a lot less than half the games if the players have equal ability.  The bid helps even up the sides, if the players know what is fair.  Way over 100 games of 1941 scenario have been played between all kinds of players on this site alone, and the vast majority of players agree that the Allies need between 6 and 15 IPC’s of stuff extra to start to make it 50/50
3) It makes each game different. 
For example, in a recent game my opponent won a bid of 10 and placed a Russian fighter on Bryatia (1941 scenario).  Russia goes before Japan in this scenario, so he could sucker punch my Z62 transport with no risk.  Then he landed the fighter on the Phillipines, a typical J1 target.  This was enough to radically alter my J1.  So the bid helps keep the first turn attacks from always being the same old, same old

The moderators have established a few rules for legal bids (you can’t just put anything anywhere you want on the board), and those rules can change from year to year.  If you want to know what has been conventional the past few years on the site, just ask.

Thanks Gamerman  :-)

I am really surprised with the bidding but I will have to take your word for it. I have only been playing 42 set up without NO and I just recently tried 41 without NO and it wasnt even normal lol. I did read in the forums though, and from this last experience, that you cannot play 41 without the NO’s. Even with the NO I am surprised that the axis are that heavily favoured. I think the axis player has to be a really good one and the allies a really bad player as well for that to be true. However I have not played enough to know so I presume these bids will come into play after a few games ;)

I would like your opinions on the latest 1942 revised game. Is it worth buying when you already own AA50 and are NOT a collector? The map looks interesting and it looks to be like a quicker game but could you really find yourself playing both AA1942 and AA50? I can see that for the axis it might be easier to be able to place units where Italy should be but not having Italy(even with minimal gameplay) its still a long & rough wait for the 1-2 punch of the allies. Thoughts pls  :?

1942 is a good game (since it uses the current AA50 naval mechanics, etc) but yes it is redundant and AA50 is superior in nearly every way.  If you are not a collector and have no need to play different versions of A&A, then no, I advise you do without 1942 just as I do.  Also, you could play 1942 online with people without buying the game, if you really want a new experience, but you haven’t even played with NO’s much yet or the 1941 scenario of AA50, so you shouldn’t even be thinking about buying another game, no.

Play against yourself (because you have equal skill with yourself) a few games of 1941 with NO’s and with the Dardanelles open and I think you will find that the Axis have a huge advantage.  I know I did when I was in your situation (had the new game, didn’t know much about it, etc)

But it holds true even for veterans.  I’ve played way over 50 games of AA50, both 1942 and 1941 scenario and I’ve played a lot of different veterans on this site.  I promise you with NO’s and Z16 not blocked off, the Axis are heavily favored if there is no bid or compensation to the Allies.

If you ever figure out how to play online with ABattlemap, ask me for a game  :-)