AA50 Rules Errata and Q+A

Since you blocked any reply to your PM, I will post it here.

@gamerman01:

EM, I just put in “China” in the search box.  Worked like a charm.  I suggest searching this thread in the future when you have a question.

If I posted a response like that to you, wouldn’t you take offense?  You basically said, “Search before wasting our time” as if the board was your personal fiefdom.  If you don’t want people asking you to provide documentation for your interpretation of the rules, don’t answer.  It’s not like I asked you personally.

@Emperor:

Since you blocked any reply to your PM, I will post it here.

@gamerman01:

EM, I just put in “China” in the search box.  Worked like a charm.  I suggest searching this thread in the future when you have a question.

If I posted a response like that to you, wouldn’t you take offense?  You basically said, “Search before wasting our time” as if the board was your personal fiefdom.  If you don’t want people asking you to provide documentation for your interpretation of the rules, don’t answer.  It’s not like I asked you personally.

You misunderstood me.  I was telling you about the search function for your convenience.  Yes, I was a bit upset that you didn’t believe me.  No, I don’t really blame you for asking for proof.

Be careful before you start calling names, please.  Besides, you’re the one who calls himself “Emperor”.

@gamerman01:

@Emperor:

Since you blocked any reply to your PM, I will post it here.

@gamerman01:

EM, I just put in “China” in the search box.  Worked like a charm.  I suggest searching this thread in the future when you have a question.

If I posted a response like that to you, wouldn’t you take offense?  You basically said, “Search before wasting our time” as if the board was your personal fiefdom.  If you don’t want people asking you to provide documentation for your interpretation of the rules, don’t answer.  It’s not like I asked you personally.

You misunderstood me.  I was telling you about the search function for your convenience.  Yes, I was a bit upset that you didn’t believe me.  No, I don’t really blame you for asking for proof.

Be careful before you start calling names, please.  Besides, you’re the one who calls himself “Emperor”.

“We forgive you” <looks aloof=“” and=“” heads=“” for=“” his=“” throne=“”>, “Vir, send in the next one”  :lol: :lol: :lol:</looks>

One more sub question :

If there is a US transport and a japan sub in sz59. Japan turn, he attacks the transport with a fighter.

May the sub move during ncm or was it considered as participating to the combat (and therefore should move during the combat move) ?

If it wants to move, it must do so during the Combat Move phase or it will be participating in the attack on the transport.

That’s what I was thinking, but was not totally sure.

Thanks for the answer !

Question about the Feb 5th FAQ Errata regarding Heavy Bombers.

Is the 2 Dice pick best apply only to SBR?

I think it applies to even normal attacks and I don’t think it nerfs the tech that bad.  Sure you still only get 1 hit but you get 2 dice rolls to try to get that hit.  It will result in less casualties from heavy bombers which I think is an attempt to make it more balanced cause when a country got the tech in the past that was all they ever built and they usually won the game by flooding boxes with dice hits.

It applies to both.

When attacking/SBRing with two or more Heavy Bombers, should we roll for each unit seperately? Or do we just through all the dice together and pick the best results out? For example: I attack with 3 Heavy Bombers - do I roll two dice for each unit seperately, or do I throw all six dice at once and pick the best three results?

Many thanks.

It’s separate - bomber by bomber.

@Krieghund:

It applies to both.

I think Heavy Bombers suck now. I think I’ll take shipyards for Russia.

@Battlingmaxo:

@Krieghund:

It applies to both.

I think Heavy Bombers suck now. I think I’ll take shipyards for Russia.

Well said.

I’m in disbelief.  I will only play the old way - I’m sure there will be no shortage of opponents who agree.

If HB are nerfed like this, then LRA needs to be +1.  Mech infantry needs to be 2 armor to carry 1 inf.  Paratroopers need to be nerfed (hmmm, like no bombing by transporting bombers?) Rocket attacks should be like the old days - 1 attack per country per turn.  Oh, and increased production?  How about taking away the 1/2 price repairs?  Because if you don’t, increased production makes a power nearly impervious to SBR, even by punked “Light Heavy” bombers.  :lol:  Hmmm, radar should be every OTHER 2 hits, so you have to keep track of that too.

My point?  Heavy bombers aren’t overpowered in AA50.  LRA is, if anything is.

If you want to tweak a heavy bomber rule, it needs to be done in Classic or Revised, a lot more than it’s needed in Anniversary.

Yes, I’ve managed to win some games where the opponent hit HB’s and LRA very early on. The key is to protect your fleets and for Germany to hit increased factory production. You know what I’m talking about gamer.

@Battlingmaxo:

Yes, I’ve managed to win some games where the opponent hit HB’s and LRA very early on. The key is to protect your fleets and for Germany to hit increased factory production. You know what I’m talking about gamer.

:-)

Ah, the memories, I will cherish them for a long time.

Yep, that’s why I said Revised and Classic need this tweak far more than 50.  50 has a bigger board - more territories - so Heavy bombers don’t cover as much ground as they used to.  The biggest thing are there are new techs that help counter heavies that weren’t there before.  Improved shipyards, increased production, radar, even war bonds.

We don’t need nerfed heavies in AA50.  If anything, it’s LRA that can kill you at almost any time, early or late.

I thought they’d already made all the adjustments that were needed to tone down the old heavy bomber doomsday scenarios.  Cheaper boats, the several compensating techs I already mentioned, NO’s that provide more money, more territories on the map, capped damage on SBR, the whole repair complex idea (as opposed to directly bombing money) etc.  Yet still people complain heavy bombers are the end-all be all.  I just haven’t seen it, and I’ve played about 30 games of AA50 with a wide variety of opponents.

Why did this rule get changed???  I’m not going to adhere - I’m only going to play people with 2-hit heavies, more out of protest for changing the rules on us than anything.  I guess the original rulebook was purposefully left ambiguous on the point (the rulebook was quite frankly terribly lacking on the tech rules, kind of expecting the reader to read the writer’s minds - see paratroopers, increased production, heavy bombers……  :|)

I used to get a chubby when I hit HBs…what am I going to do now??  I don’t think Viagra and super subs will cut it.

@Battlingmaxo:

I used to get a chubby when I hit HBs…what am I going to do now??  I don’t think Viagra and super subs will cut it.

You’re on a roll today, maxo.  :lol:  Maybe you should add some lube.

I completely agree - when I played one time before this infernal rule change with the best of 2 dice idea, I suddenly lost my desire to invest in researchers, and with it, my excitement over tech.  I still think all the other techs are cool and fun, but when HB’s are NEUTERED it takes all the fun out, and that’s what the game is about.

Also, if my opponent gets LRA now, the only good counter is getting LRA myself, or improved shipyards maybe.  If I hit these castrated heavy bombers, I will not be satisfied - his tech will be much better than mine!  Why take away our heavy bombers??  Like I said, take down all the other techs with it, and then you’ll have to cut the price of researchers to 4 or something.  It ain’t broke, so don’t fix it!

I’m wondering, can a bomber SBR an IC AND attack a territory as well? I thought in AA50 they could only do one or the other, not both. Or am I out to lunch?

@The:

I’m wondering, can a bomber SBR an IC AND attack a territory as well? I thought in AA50 they could only do one or the other, not both. Or am I out to lunch?

No you are not out to lunch TDJ, it’s one or the other but now with the rule changes it might as well be the other.

Thanks for sharing that, Yoper.

I don’t think Germany can possibly get bombed into the Stone Age unless her income is down to 20.  Early in the game when Germany is pulling in 40-55 per turn, the max repair cost would be 20.  G could still build to max capacity even with max bombing.  It’s not like the old days when there was no damage cap.

The old games need this rule change a lot more than AA50.

The Italian fleet doesn’t last more than 2-3 rounds if the Allies don’t want it to.  It is rare to get heavy bombers that early in the game.  In the first round, little is spent on tech because the NO’s haven’t been collected yet.  Oh, and even with the new rule, heavy bombers early with the US or UK would spell certain doom for the Italian fleet, with or without the change.

Don’t forget the increased production tech.  If Germany has that, and only one factory, then it only costs 10 to fully repair a maxed out complex.  Even with the “old” heavy bombers, if a power has increased production (just as likely as getting heavy bombers, of course) it’s not such a great deal to be bombing away.  And what if they had radar, too?  Then it would be unthinkable, EVEN WITH HEAVY BOMBERS. (many times Germany builds a factory on France, too, so I don’t get this 1 factory constraint everyone always talks so much about)  (Germany usually has Karelia, too)