Mobilzation question

@axis_roll:

One of the items in our house rules for AA50 (The Chicago Rules) is:

3)  Restricted Dardenelles straight:  Bulgaria is the only territory accessible via transport(s) in sz16

So the Sea zone is still open to ships, but only land accessible to Bulgaria.  Doesn’t remove the sea zone from play, but eliminates the Med drops into Caucasus and/or Ukraine

This is exactly as it should be…  :-D

Although I have only played a few games of AA50 a few things seem clear regardless of the scenario:

1. Chinamen vaporize faster than the humans In War of the Worlds…for a 1940 population of 455mil you have a better chance of finding a brontosaurus on the map by turn 3, possibly by turn 2 with the 41 scenario. Perhaps the spawn policy should be changed…maybe 1 for every 2 terr rounded up.

2. He/she who controls the Gaza strip rules the world…the strip between Egypt and India plays a major role in deciding the game. If this is in allied hands the russians can usually hold the Caucases… if not their position is tenuous. conversely,

3. Germans cannot live on a diet of sauerbraten alone… a little linguini and sushi help the digestion (of Russia) If the russian player is good I think it is difficult to do it with Germany alone. Just as russia need to hold out until the allies arrive Germany only needs to hold the front with/without  Italy’s help until you can get double/triple penetration on cau/rus with Japan.  Italy can either support france freeing the huns for eastward movement or shuttle thru Istanbul  Btw, I think closed Dardanelles is for pussies.

4. NOs…I don’t know. The axis NOs are more easily obtained but I certainly like the extra 5 I get in russia for no foreigners as it lets me squeeze an armor in here and there.

5. Pocket change…whenever I have a few extra scheckles I find myself buying subs particularly in a no tech game.  Its like a boxer with a good jab. keeps the Japs out of the Americans face, also good for the Med.

6. Advantage who…are the axis really favored???  I am currently plaing a gencom rules game where axis recieved a bid. Maybe this is to offset the allied VC
advantage with an 8 turn / 6 hour limit  an no NOs    I’d like to know peoples thoughts on who is favored and why

Axis_roll is correct.  Sea units may not enter or leave sea zone 16 under this optional rule.  Bulgaria/Romania being cut off from the Mediterranean is just a by-product of the way the map is drawn.

free 1d6 dmg to each IC in range is pretty good if you ask me. japan and usa need to do some shuffling if they get this, but everyone else gets to start shooting right away

Also note that your british fighters dont get to shoot at the german sub at all, as you are not bringing a destroyer along with you.

Thanks guys.  The faq clears up a few things too.  Am planning a 2nd game Friday and will be playing the allies again.

@Rammstein:

Can Chinese units be placed on a territory that it just captured? ex. If China takes Manchuria with 1 Inf remaining, can it place its “purchased” Inf on it that turn?

Yes.

@Rammstein:

If so, can US planes land on a newly captured Chinese territory?

No.  The US and China share a turn, so planes from either nation can’t land in territories captured by either one on the same turn.

@Rammstein:

Does the 3 unit limit refer to Chinese or Allies units?

Chinese units only, including the Flying Tigers.

@Rammstein:

Can a US plane attack a German sub if a UK destroyer is present?

No.  The UK destroyer will not be involved in the battle, so it doesn’t enable the plane to hit the sub.

@Rammstein:

1 Sub attacks 1 Carrier w 2 Fighters, do the Fighters roll for defence?

No, since there is no defending destroyer.

@Rammstein:

Placing Fighters on newly built Carriers: you can place newly built Fighters on newly built Carriers, right?

Yes.

@Rammstein:

Do existing Fighters have to end their movement in the territory where the Carrier is to be placed, or do they simply land on the territory where the Factory producing the carrier is? This could be important if a Fighter is low on movement.

The fighters must end their movement in the sea zone in which the carrier will be placed.

@Rammstein:

Here’s a situation that has bothered me for a while:
Let’s say that Japan has 5 Transports in a SZ (a juicy target), next to that SZ they have 3 Battleships with Destroyers, Carriers, etc… it’s huge. One SZ away from this huge Jap fleet is 1 US Carrier w 1 Fighter, and 1 Destroyer. If the Jap Transports are 3 spaces away from the US fleet, the Jap Battleships etc 2 spaces, and 1 empty SZ in between, could you attack the huge Jap fleet with your Destroyer (the assumption being you could theoretically win any battle), and plan to move your Carrier into that SZ in NC Movement, while sending your Fighter to attack the Transports?
The best way I can put it is: can you sacrifice any given warship in order to send Fighters on a suicidal attack under the assumption that your Carrier will be in range in NC Movement? Obviously, it would be worth it for the US in this case. However, the US Destroyer will obviously die, and the US Fighter will have nowhere to land. In this case, does the plane “crash”, thus allowing the US to sacrifice some units for a big payoff, or is this situation not legal at all?

It’s legal.  As long as there is any chance whatsoever, no matter how remote, that the fighter will be able to land, the move is legal.

Check out the FAQ for further information.

Danke!

I like that.

The bombing runs and the damage markers give you some flexibility – still painful as all getup, but a great new addition to the SBR rules.