Who nedd a PDF of the rules.

This question is rather ambiguous. If you’re attacking with aircraft only (no land units), it’s not an amphibious assault. If you mean, “Can I conduct an amphibious assault without cruisers or battleships for shore bombardment?”, the answer is yes, you can. When conducting an amphibious assault, you have to choose which aircraft will participate in any naval battle and which will participate in the land combat; they cannot do both. Any naval battle must be resolved before amphibious landings can take place.

Ok thanks Simon33. This is in the global europe rules which I found.

Why not ask if you need a transport to cross the Tasman sea. Heck, people can swim the English Channel so therefore no transport should be required, right?

Fair dinkum. This has got to be one of the weirdest A&A questions I’ve heard.

@Stauffenberg:

Reading and understanding the rules is one thing, not very hard to do. BUT remembering all of them and bringing them into context with each other is a lot more complicated and the practical experience playing Global shows that there a lot of small “problems” occuring due to the fact that the rules are clear, but complex and complected.

Just look at the FAQ here on the board and the rather huge amount of videos about Global, they show that there is a need for information beyond the rulebooks. Or at least for a rulebook that is not divided into 2 parts, with a few more examples giving practical advice.

Laws are another example of this sort of thing.  To really understand a piece of legislation, you of course need to start with the text of the law itself, but then you often need to add other things…for example the administrative regulations (if any) that govern the application of the law, and the jurisprudence surrounding the law that may have been generated when judges have ruled on court cases that have involved the law.  After laws are initially published in their official form by government printing offices, some of them probably get re-published by commercial publishers in annotated editions which contain both the text of the law itself (what it says) and accompanying legal commentary (providing an opinion on what the law means and how it is customarily applied).  YG’s project sounds like it’s along the lines of such an “annotated edition” and it would have the same kind of usefulness to A&A gamers as such annotated editions have for lawyers, law students, legal schloars and so forth.

Thanks!

@SSPanther:

Hey Krieghund (sp?) or anyone else out there, I need to questions answered for a game we are playing now.

1. If the US is not yet at war with Japan, and flies their fighter from the Philipinnes to Burma or Kwangtung, if the Japanese then attack the British in either of those territories, does it provoke the US and bring them into the war? Or can this non-combat move even be made by the US

1. The US, while neutral, cannot move units into or over territories that do not belong to them.  They cannot move a fighter into a UK territory, and thus this example can never happen.

@SSPanther:

2. Can Russia, when not yet at war, move ships into a seazone with UK ships, and can they move into a seazone with German ships?

3. Can Russia, when not at war, move into NW Persia?

Thank you!

2. Yes

3. No, not until at war on that side of the board (so war against German or Italy).

@Frontovik:

@Krieghund:

Territories with Chinese symbols printed on them are original Chinese territories, so Japan may not build major ICs on them.

so it just leaves Korea for an IC?

Yup.  It leaves Korea for a MAJOR IC.  As stated above, Minors can still be placed in foreign soil.

Yes, one sub can reach it and that one should be moved there. Combine it with a massive move to Carolines and from there you can pick Hawaii, most ANZAC territories, most of DEI, Phillipines, etc.