USA Political rules

@Rammstein:

Does this mean that ANZAC can “take” the territory with Fighters? Or it can simply land them there for defense and the territory remains Dutch? For that matter, must UK and ANZAC be at war with Japan in order to “take” the Dutch territories at all?

They must use land units to take the territory and they don’t have to be at war to do so

That’s correct.

Yoper:

“But spelling mistakes are different from people actually having troubles understanding certain ideas or concepts in the rules.”

Yes, they are different, but both fall under the jurisdiction of the editor(s).  That being said, I agree that “Trying to put forth a rule (like the political rules in AAP 40) in a way that is clear to all is a tough task.”

From what I’ve read, it seems that people should also apply some common sense - especially those who’ve been playing A&A games for many years.  I’ve lost track of how many times I’ve read of someone wanting a clarification - only to wonder why it needed to be clarified in the first place.

As to the spelling mistakes… well that’s just plain shoddy workmanship.  No, it doesn’t effect gameplay, and I’m still going to have fun playing the game. But if people are shelling out a fair amount of money for a game - they expect a higher quality product, one that doesn’t have spelling errors (which is something that might be expected from a garage based game publisher - not a major manufacturer).  And there is the element of presentation as well, in this kind of medium, it’s important.  And c’mon, consider the demographic of your buyers… we’re talking about guys (mainly) that go through great lengths such as painting the pieces, inventing pages of optional rules, making new maps etc.  Of course spelling mistakes are going to leap out at the average A&A enthusiast!

You stated, “I would like you (or anyone else) to give me a list of all the spelling mistakes in the rulebook.”  I’m not about to be an unpaid editor/proofer, but the point is that if there is one… that’s one too many.  It’s not that difficult to publish something without spelling mistakes - its done everyday.  And a lot of these publications don’t even have the benefit of more than one editor. Perhaps I’m a bit retentive in regard to the spelling issue, but I am obviously not alone in this stance.

BTW - I too don’t think anyone should be pointing fingers at the wardog or Larry Harris, it’s not like they design and produce the whole game themselves…

The only way ANZAC could take control of Malaya would be if India and Malaya are under Japan’s control.  If ANZAC invaded and wins, then Malaya’s IPC’s go to ANZAC.  However, once India is liberated, then control reverts back to UK.

@Gargantua:

I have to give Krieghund an AMEN here.  He is one of the ONLY people involved in the game creation, who is reaching out to fans, to try and help them out, and support a product that was at some point improperly managed and sent to consumers.  Atleast HE is standing by HIS contribution to the product.

Thanks, but I’m just the “point man”.  Larry and WotC are behind this errata effort 100%, otherwise I wouldn’t be allowed to do it.

Thank you for the quick response.

If US decides to build up in HAW seazone, your aircraft are useless for a complete round (or more). Because you can’t fight that seazone (6 spaces). As US player I would just sit tight, build up and move to Japan via a northern route. Or go to Indies via southern route (Australia). Or build up TR with loads of cargo to take out Carolines. For every fighter it costs Japan it costs an inf for US.

And I think it will be a very dull way to play, or am I mistaken?

That’s workable. Anything would be better then 1 DD see’s everything right out of the box. You could even house rule something like that into AA50, just make it part of the radar tech. 1 for 1 until you get advanced radar(tech) then 1 DD see’s all subs. Its even kinda how the radar tech works. You fire AA guns @ 1 until you develop radar giving your AA guns a kill @ 2. Early in the game subs could easily out number DD’s, but you would still get limited detection. I might have to try this next game.

This would also work when air units & DD attack subs. Matched up 1 for 1. Excess subs would be allowed to submerge, unless the power w/DD & air units also has radar. At that point subs could not submerge til the DD is destroyed, just how it is now

Come on give subs more bite! :evil: