Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

@simon33 I’ve never played or seen first edition. G402E was first A&A I ever played, then bought. Couldn’t play it much tho because friends’ moderate interest in it faded. So I wasn’t mixing up versions’ rules but I was playing the game incorrectly till I got here. These forums helped clear all that up!

@colt45554 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@simon33 I’ve never played or seen first edition. G402E was first A&A I ever played, then bought. Couldn’t play it much tho because friends’ moderate interest in it faded. So I wasn’t mixing up versions’ rules but I was playing the game incorrectly till I got here. These forums helped clear all that up!

Yeah so when @simon33 said that “first edition had some weird rules surrounding scrambling from islands”, I think he means Pacific and Europe 1st edition? Because A&A classic (Milton Bradley 1984/87) doesn’t have any rules regarding aircraft scrambling.

@colt45554: Yeah Europe and Pacific or Global19402E are not good products for introducing new players or casual players. Even veteran board game lovers will be discouraged by the sheer scope and complexity of it. I find myself longing for a slight shorter, slightly less complex game. I though A&A Revised (2004) was the right mix of depth and complexity without being overwhelming.

@greyleaf3 There is always what Triple-A calls v5, preferably with the setup update known as 42.3. Weakens Germany a bit. Probably not too complex to introduce people to and shorter game play. Really, an update of revised to include cruisers and a few other things so not so huge a leap to Global as compared to from 1941.

Can a Romanian factory place a transport in sea zone 100 while the Turkish strait is closed?

@young-grasshopper sure…they just can’t leave the zone until the strait is opened.

@snigg that’s what I thought, thanks

@young-grasshopper Just build a Battleship why don’t cha- Throoow your Ipcs away!!!😏

@nolimit said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@young-grasshopper Just build a Battleship why don’t cha- Throoow your Ipcs away!!!😏

maybe he wants to attack caucasus ? :)

Could make sense if there is an airbase although the airbase defences can be overpowered.

Question regarding the Danish Straits. If the US lands in Norway and is able to build a MIC on the following turn, can newly built ships then be placed in the Baltic Sea, bypassing the need to control Denmark? I assume it is possible When looking at Norway’s shoreline and touching four SZs, I just wouldn’t be able to bring any existing ships through the Straits without taking Denmark. Am I correct with this assumption?

Yes…

I’m practicing against the computer, my question is how come I can’t place a British factory upgrade in South America, Egypt or Ontario?

It has to have a value of 3 and +

@tcnance
Major industrial complexes can be built only in originally controlled (not captured) territories with an IPC value of 3 or higher.

A minor industrial complex can be upgraded to a major one at a cost of 20 IPCs. The industrial complex to be upgraded must be located on an originally controlled (not captured) territory that you have controlled since the beginning of your turn and that has an IPC value of 3 or higher.

@captainnapalm

Notably, Manchuria does not count as originally controlled. I have no idea why it doesnt, since you control that territory at the start of the game.

@squirecam said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@captainnapalm

Notably, Manchuria does not count as originally controlled. I have no idea why it doesnt, since you control that territory at the start of the game.

That is explanied in the Pacific rulebook, page 8:
“A few territories in China have a Chinese emblem on them but
are controlled by Japan at the start of the game. These
territories are considered to belong to China originally, but
have been captured by Japan.”

@panther

I know what is in the rule book. But it’s still nonsense. Why are Norway and Romania considered original German territories? Because that makes no sense either…

@squirecam Yep, there’s a lot of Abstract things about the game but it’s such a Great time playing it that we have learned to accept it as is- otherwise it’s just not A&A anymore if it was almost as realistic as the Real War was, you could always use your Own House rules to your personal liking anyway!!!

@squirecam said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@panther

I know what is in the rule book. But it’s still nonsense. Why are Norway and Romania considered original German territories? Because that makes no sense either…

Ok, for further answers to this, if Kiangsu was originally Japanese they could build a major factory on it so that is prohibited. Would also require a long list of exceptions to the non chinese territories that China is allowed to occupy, and also require exceptions to allow China to mobilise there. Far easier to just call it originally Chinese.

Whereas Norway could be its own power with no capital like the Dutch but that would have no effect on the gameplay except that Germany couldn’t build a major complex but they would never want to. I guess Italy or Japan could retake it from the allies.

Also the Chinese coastal territories could become US/UK/ANZ.