Official Rules Clarifications

@Von-Kuulness You are reading the rules correctly.
Your submarine would only have been able to retreat if it had established a valid alternative retreat route during combat movement (in case that had been possible, it depends on the map of course).

Thanks for the clarification Barney. Let’s hope I don’t find a prop in my master bedroom. :) you guys are great! :)

I know how to read, SH, I do it for a living.

I’ve played a lot of games, and since I’d played Axis and Allies before, I didn’t read the rules at all.  I was much more interested in playing a game, 90% of which was already familiar.  We consulted the rules when there was confusion, which was often.  Reading the rules in detail first might have been helpful, but it still didn’t answer most of the 10% of questions that come up as exceptions, nuances or rare situations, which is why I read these boards.    Sure there was plenty of slop and mistakes, but I admit when I’m wrong and try to do it correctly going forward.

@Zarito:

I was just wondering if it is allowed to send more than two planes to a battle in a seazone when only one carrier could be there at the end of turn. The motivation would be that some of the aircraft would die in the battle and each individual aircraft can land on the carrier. Did not find an answer in the rulebook but probably didn’t look thoroughly enough.

Look here:

@rulebook:

Air Units
…
You cannot deliberately send air units into combat situations that place them out of range of a place to land afterward. In the
Combat Move phase, prior to rolling any battles, you must be able to demonstrate some possible way (however remote the
possibility is) for all your attacking air units to land safely that turn. This could include a combination of combat moves. It
could also include noncombat moves by a carrier or the mobilization of a new carrier.

In order to demonstrate that an air unit might have a safe landing zone, you may assume that all of your attacking rolls will
be hits, and all defending rolls will be misses. You may NOT, however, use a planned retreat of any carrier to demonstrate
a possible safe landing zone for any fighter or tactical bomber. Once possible landing spaces for all attacking air units have
been demonstrated, you have no obligation to guarantee those landing zones for air units in the course of battle. For example,
aircraft carriers may freely retreat or be taken as casualties, even if doing so leaves air units with no place to land after
combat (such air units will be destroyed at the end of the Noncombat Move phase). However, during noncombat movement
and new unit mobilization, you must provide for safe landing of as many air units as possible after all combats are resolved.
…

HTH :-)

As for G42 it is geared toward tournament play, but it could be used as a way to teach Global more quickly. I like the idea of having nations like France having a role in WWII, but G42 short cuts much of the tedious wait because all the players are at war. It is a quickened version of G40, but it’s also a good alternative for players who need a shorter game session but like the complexity of Global.

I haven’t tried a F2F game yet but I would have an easier time getting a session in with the 42 set-up than Global. I also think G42 may pick up steam if it’s supported by the A&A community by and large due to the fact that we had five releases of the series less than than two years ago and won’t likey get another unless a second edition of 1914 is released.

Check out the set-up and if you like it show your support.

@Krieghund:

As I have explained before, the reason Chinese movement is limited is to reflect the historical fact that China was also embroiled in a civil war (Nationalists versus Communists) at the same time that it was fighting the Japanese invaders.  As such, it had little interest in matters outside its own borders (keeping the Burma Road open for Allied aid being an obvious exception).  This restriction keeps China from influencing the game outside of its borders without having complicated rules to represent the impact of this conflict.

Don’t forget about the warlord factions!:)  Sure they were nominally supportive of Chaing but he had to keep a decent force back just to police his ‘allies’.

Sorry, my bad.  :-D