Sub combat question

@Krieghund:

No.  It must end its movement in the space in which it wants to land.

sneaky idea, though.

No, but it applies to them as well.

in AA50, you can ignore enemy transports.  i also believe thats the case in AA42

@Krieghund:

… Only one cruiser hits, but all three defending destroyers hit…

I hate when that happens, but it’s part of the game.  :|

Sucks to be you then  :-(

Welcome Cobblepot!  AA50 is a great game.  If you run into problems finding opponents and/or time to play,
then check out AA50 Modules for Battlemap, and try PBF (Play by Forum) here on this website.

@gamerman01:

@naturesprank:

Yeah, gamerman, I am aware of that most recent update. We don’t use it, since it negates much of the fun of getting HBs in the first place and we have been playing with the published rules for over a year. My playing group doesn’t always like to implement the updated rules errata that we come across. You shouldn’t need to access forums like these to play the game, so we usually use the OOB rules unless there is a conflict or complete misunderstanding.

Yeah, right on.

Unfortunately, there are quite a few ambiguities in the rulebook.  I have had to ask several different rules questions.  If you guys can’t agree on a rule, just post your question in the FAQ and errata thread under AA50, and you’ll have an answer in no time.  Probably not a bad idea to scan through that thread and see the answers to lots of questions…

True on all counts, and we have used that resource numerous times. Especially as pertains to subs, the OOB rules are very vague.

Even using the updated best-of 2 dice rule for HBs, the Americans can send a lot of heat toward the Rome, Berlin and Karelia ICs when not doing huge dmg to ITA or GER fleets. It’s nice to know that you will probably (89% on 2 HB) roll a minimum of 3 per HB during SBRs after risking them to AA. It might not seem like enough, but we seem to agree that the best early pressure US can exert on Ger is via SBR.  And getting HBs definitely helps with that. It, along with LR air, seem to have the biggest impact on our games.

I agree.  The use of subs with aircraft is a gret combo for naval combat  (even better if you have super subs).  You can even make it cheaper if you have long range aircraft and jet fighter, transforming your fighters in better weapon than the original bomber.

I’m sorry to disagree, but long range aircraft benefits bombers so much it would be a waste to switch to fighters. Although saving 2 IPC per unit is nice, being able to bombard any territory or sea zone on the map at will is much too good to give up on - and thats what long range bombers do!

@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.