AA50 Rules Errata and Q+A

Heading back up to your logic up above–its not “units that can (in some situations) retreat”. It is units in this situation that can retreat (attacking tts yes defending ones no). That rule is written as it is to cover the situations where submerged subs, unhittable units (subs vs planes) or amphibious assaults where some units can retreat and others cant.

As a lawyer–I get what you’re trying to do and say that the rule doesn’t say what its supposed to say. As Krieg points out, that’s up for debate. Many lawsuits are about this kind of thing.

But that’s not because its dogma Canon law its because the other outcome is insensible, contradictory, gamey, requires a tortured reading of the language devised over multiple editions and revisons of the game to try and cover so many different situations.

there is no such thing as a perfect document try to write one

@MidnightExpress:

I just saw two AA50 auctions on ebay sell for $185.02 and $201 plus shipping so it’s not an unattainable game.

Yeah…but did you notice that it was the same person that won each of those items?

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=231322439104&_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2765
http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=251630644174&_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2765

k***y must have really wanted two copies @ a total cost of $410.32 (shipping included), or maybe they were just shill bids?  Who knows…but it was those two auctions that directly led me to simply purchase some HBG and FMG Italian units and augment my 1942.2 game  :-P

@Adlertag:

@bugoo:

How would the odds fall with 3 subs 1 bomber?

Now that was a depravity line of thinking. Imagine Eisenhower abort D-day 1944 because the odds was not good enough. We would all be speaking german now. If you want to win games, you need to strenghten your fighting spirit and breed more aggression. Peacekeepers dont win wars, you know that, now do you ? Butt enough talk. Now you better gimme a + karma and help me reach the magic 800 before Frog.

good luck with 800, but i’ll support :)

or worse, we would be speaking russian!

I created those tiles and yes, of course. That’s why I created them after all. Now if only the developers can work out their recent legal woes with Hasbro.

I guess by the responses I have read it is unanimous, Italy is better as a seperate entity mainly due to the added possibilities that it creates and the overall strategy changes it allows from both sides.
The other thing I really do like is that with 6 countries it is axis then allies turns rotated so as to not have two allied turns back to back. It is harder to double team that way.
Thank you every one for your thoughts. 8-)

Also, should your Japanese fleet survive they have a choice:

they are locked into staying, and depending on what you built, you may or may not want to stay anyhow.

I was just looking over the new AA50 board image and it occured to me how arbitrary the geography is in this game.

Why is the Belgian Congo in this game at all?

Spain is off limits, even though certainly in the realm of possible history/gameplay Spain could have been a major player or battlefield of WWII; a lot more of a possibility than French Eq Africa or the Belgian Congo which are indeed in play.

Certainly Turkey could have been a significant factor in this alternative universe of a game we call Axis & Allies than ever could have would been French West Africa or Rhodesia.

Yet there they are: Belgian Congo, French West Africa, Rhodesia all open for invasion. Spain and Turkey and others are closed off.

This is so ahistorical, we disagree about countless other nuances and rules about being historically deficient. Yet without Spain and Turkey, we are are not even accorded the ability to play out WWII in ways which could have indeed happened a lot more probable than the invasion of the Belgian Congo and Rhodesia by the Nazi war machine.

Why of all the possibilities of the Axis and Allies timeline/universe are these 2 of the more likely ones that could have happend are indeed shut down?