AAG40 FAQ

Lets say my aircraft carrier with 2 fighters is attacked by 2 destroyers. During the first round, the destroyers each score hits, but I also sink both destroyers with my casualty fire. If I decide to apply both hits to the carrier, can my fighters land safely elsewhere within range, or are they required to land on the undamaged carrier essentially forcing me to apply both hits to the 2 aircraft?

@Young:

Lets say my aircraft carrier with 2 fighters is attacked by 2 destroyers. During the first round, the destroyers each score hits, but I also sink both destroyers with my casualty fire. If I decide to apply both hits to the carrier, can my fighters land safely elsewhere within range, or are they required to land on the undamaged carrier essentially forcing me to apply both hits to the 2 aircraft?

If you want the planes to land somewhere besides the carrier, you would need to take one or both hits on the carrier, making it so the planes cannot land there.

You cannot choose to have the planes land on an island or territory in/by that seazone or carrier in an adjacent seazone unless the carrier can no longer pick them up (one, or more).

That said, you’re not obligated to assign damage to keep the planes alive.  You can, if you wanted to, apply both points of damage to the carrier and the planes could have no other available landing space.  You wouldn’t do this, but you can.

So you could either:

1. take both hits on the carrier - two planes need a landing space within one move or they die.
2. take one hit on the carrier and one hit on a plane - the remaining plane needs a landing space within one move or it dies.
3. take both hits on the planes.  Carrier remains undamaged.

So in my senerio, the aircraft get a movement value of 1 to land safely. That would mean that there would need to be a friendly island within or friendly territory adjacent to contested sea zone in order to lose the carrier and still save the fighters. Is that what you’re saying?

@Young:

So in my senerio, the aircraft get a movement value of 1 to land safely. That would mean that there would need to be a friendly island within or friendly territory adjacent to contested sea zone in order to lose the carrier and still save the fighters. Is that what you’re saying?

yes.

The latest update to alpha 3 says that carrier based aircraft can roll for disruption but the carrier can’t roll in this case.  Does this mean a carrier with no aircraft aboard gets to roll?

Let’s say my carrier with 2 fighters attacks 5 enemy destroyers. I score 2 hits with my fighters sinking 2 destroyers, and the return fire also hit me twice. Can I choose to sink my carrier and continue the battle with my fighters, even though they have no legal landing if they survive? My guess is yes, as long as I arrive with a legal landing space (the carrier) I can sink my carrier knowing that if my fighters survive, they too will crash in the water without the required landing space when the battle is finished, is that correct?

Also (same senerio), if my fighters, have already used their maximum movement value to enter the contested sea zone, and I decide to retreat my 2 fighters after I have sunk my carrier after round one, do I receive the 1 movement alowence to land in a friendly territory (if one exists) from the direction in which the attacking units came from? Or am I required to continue the battle without the possibility of retreat?

@moralecheck:

The latest update to alpha 3 says that carrier based aircraft can roll for disruption but the carrier can’t roll in this case.  Does this mean a carrier with no aircraft aboard gets to roll?

It does not.

@Young:

Let’s say my carrier with 2 fighters attacks 5 enemy destroyers. I score 2 hits with my fighters sinking 2 destroyers, and the return fire also hit me twice. Can I choose to sink my carrier and continue the battle with my fighters, even though they have no legal landing if they survive? My guess is yes, as long as I arrive with a legal landing space (the carrier) I can sink my carrier knowing that if my fighters survive, they too will crash in the water without the required landing space when the battle is finished, is that correct?

Yes.

@Young:

Also (same senerio), if my fighters, have already used their maximum movement value to enter the contested sea zone, and I decide to retreat my 2 fighters after I have sunk my carrier after round one, do I receive the 1 movement alowence to land in a friendly territory (if one exists) from the direction in which the attacking units came from? Or am I required to continue the battle without the possibility of retreat?

You may retreat, but the fighters get no extra movement and will crash in the sea zone after the battle, so there is no reason to retreat.

OK, but if a tank moves it’s maximum movement value of 2 into an attack and wants to retreat, it will receive a retreating movement value of 1 in the direction in which it came, but fighters don’t get this extra movement point if they retreat?

@Young:

OK, but if a tank moves it’s maximum movement value of 2 into an attack and wants to retreat, it will receive a retreating movement value of 1 in the direction in which it came, but fighters don’t get this extra movement point if they retreat?

Correct, because aircraft don’t retreat with land or sea units.  They retreat on their own, during the non combat phase, and don’t get an “extra movement”.  However, this means they can retreat to a different space than the land units retreated to.  In addition, their movement to the attacking space won’t count as one of the spaces you can retreat to UNLESS a land or sea unit moved through or from there as well.

OK, thankyou.

Next question: My opponent will attack my ships with air units in a sea zone adjacent to an airbase with 3 of my fighters on it. He finishes all his combat movements and before he begins to roll, I declair that I am scrambling my 3 fighters into the sea battle. He will than get upset that he didn’t bring enough into the battle, and blames me for not making him aware of my scramble possibilities. He always demands a “redo” of his attacks, and I feel that if I warn him all the time, I won’t ever get the chance use my bases the way they were ment to be used.

Also, if I am attacking his ships in a sea zone where he is able to scramble aircraft, do I have to ask him if he is going to scramble, or is it up to him to be aware of his own scrambling possibilities before I roll. I don’t want to hear advise about what’s right or wrong or how to not to be unsportsmanlike like. I want an actual rule. I appreciate that it is up to everyone to look for and point out convoy disruptions because I am obligated under the rules to do so, and I’m ok with that. I need to know what is the rule about notifying scramble possibilities for both attacker and defender, and I will obey a written rule, but not unwritten rules.

@Young:

OK, thankyou.

Next question: My opponent will attack my ships with air units in a sea zone adjacent to an airbase with 3 of my fighters on it. He finishes all his combat movements and before he begins to roll, I declair that I am scrambling my 3 fighters into the sea battle. He will than get upset that he didn’t bring enough into the battle, and blames me for not making him aware of my scramble possibilities. He always demands a “redo” of his attacks, and I feel that if I warn him all the time, I won’t ever get the chance use my bases the way they were ment to be used.

Also, if I am attacking his ships in a sea zone where he is able to scramble aircraft, do I have to ask him if he is going to scramble, or is it up to him to be aware of his own scrambling possibilities before I roll. I don’t want to hear advise about what’s right or wrong or how to not to be unsportsmanlike like. I want an actual rule. I appreciate that it is up to everyone to look for and point out convoy disruptions because I am obligated under the rules to do so, and I’m ok with that. I need to know what is the rule about notifying scramble possibilities for both attacker and defender, and I will obey a written rule, but not unwritten rules.

This is mostly gray area and etiquette - there is no written rule, and it is up to the defender to announce.

Regarding 1)
There is no rule obligation for you to allow him to “redo” anything.  You were aware of scrambling and at the phase where it’s relevent (after all combat moves are finished), you declared you would scramble.  It’s his own fault for not paying attention.   It is stated in the rules that the attacker is NOT permitted to change combat movement or attacks after scrambling is declared. At the same time, if he’s not as experienced a player, then you can, if you choose, warn him prior to any combat moves, but you are NOT obligated to.

Regarding 2)
It is polite to ask whether scrambling will happen AFTER all combat moves are complete, but again, you’re not required to.  The attacker must assume he will scramble and stack accordingly, but the attacker is not obligated by a written rule to ask if he will, and the defender can have a poker face and play completely oblivious to scrambling possibilities until the attacker is finished with his moves.

That said, you should never assume he’ll forget and then not mention the possibility, because it sounds as though you’re playing a less experienced person and trying to slip a mickey.  Don’t take advantage of a player’s experience if it’s going to ruin the game environment or a friendship.  This is a beer and pretzels sort of game - bragging rights are only good if they’re going to want to play again.

When in doubt, consider Wheaton’s Law.

@kcdzim:

When in doubt, consider Wheaton’s Law.

Bazinga!

Don’t feel too sorry for my opponent. He is very experienced, competitive, and can kick my a•• any given Sunday. He just has problems identifying scramble opportunities which I will be taking full advantage of, until he brightens up. No worrys about us fighting over it, A&A is a great game, but it’s not near strong enough to get between our friendship.

@Young:

OK, thankyou.

Next question: My opponent will attack my ships with air units in a sea zone adjacent to an airbase with 3 of my fighters on it. He finishes all his combat movements and before he begins to roll, I declair that I am scrambling my 3 fighters into the sea battle. He will than get upset that he didn’t bring enough into the battle, and blames me for not making him aware of my scramble possibilities. He always demands a “redo” of his attacks, and I feel that if I warn him all the time, I won’t ever get the chance use my bases the way they were ment to be used.

A)  If this is a friendly game and you play many games with this person, warn him that he needs to pay better attention and that “this is the last time I’m going to remind you of my scramble possibilities, you need to keep track of where my airbases are and assume, if you attack adjacent sea zones, that I will be scrambling to defend them.”

B)  If this is a league or tournament game, tell him to stuff it.

C)  Either way, inform him that combat moves are final once dice fall. You might want to be nice and let him off for the current round, especially if in the scenario presented in case A.

@Young:

Also, if I am attacking his ships in a sea zone where he is able to scramble aircraft, do I have to ask him if he is going to scramble, or is it up to him to be aware of his own scrambling possibilities before I roll. I don’t want to hear advise about what’s right or wrong or how to not to be unsportsmanlike like. I want an actual rule. I appreciate that it is up to everyone to look for and point out convoy disruptions because I am obligated under the rules to do so, and I’m ok with that. I need to know what is the rule about notifying scramble possibilities for both attacker and defender, and I will obey a written rule, but not unwritten rules.

According to the actual rules, your opponent should be moving his units to the defender side of the “battle board” and thus, if he does not move any scrambled fighters, then they are not scrambled.  However, refer to the above, you might want to ask if he wants to scramble.  This is almost a rule for online play, since there is no battle board.

@moralecheck:

@kcdzim:

When in doubt, consider Wheaton’s Law.

Bazinga!

I know bazinga, but I don’t know Wheaton’s Law…

@Cmdr:

@moralecheck:

@kcdzim:

When in doubt, consider Wheaton’s Law.

Bazinga!

I know bazinga, but I don’t know Wheaton’s Law…

“Don’t be a dick”

OOB-Rules

UK sz110. 1 Destroyer, 2 Submarines

Germany enters sz110 with 1 Tactical and 3 loaded transport.

Can Germany do an amphibious assault?

Is the Seazone hostile until the Destroyer is removed or until all the combatmoves are completely done?

@Wirre:

OOB-Rules

UK sz110. 1 Destroyer, 2 Submarines

Germany enters sz110 with 1 Tactical and 3 loaded transport.

Can Germany do an amphibious assault?

Is the Seazone hostile until the Destroyer is removed or until all the combatmoves are completely done?

Per Alpha rules:  Germany could NEVER do an amphibious assault in that instance.  They have absolutely no method of removing the submarines from the board, and you WILL have battle as the UK destroyer makes the seazone hostile.  Even if the UK didn’t have the destroyer, the 2 subs alone would have prevented the amphibious assault unless germany brought a surface warship with them.  That tac can only hit the destroyer, and if, in the best circumstances, the destroyer and subs missed and the Tac hit, Germany must retreat or they eventually will lose three transports.

Per OOB rules:  Germany could NEVER do an amphibious assault in that instance.  They have absolutely no method of removing the submarines from the board, and you WILL have battle as the UK destroyer makes the seazone hostile.  Once you’re in combat, the subs have no reason to submerge and combat won’t be resolved until there are no legal targets remaining. Since sub rolls count as hits to transports when there’s no other targets, eventually they’ll kill the transports unless Germany retreats, leaving the Tac alive but alone (if it managed to kill the destroyer without getting shot itself).

AND in OOB I think the UK gets to perform the sub sneak attack rule (not to be confused with the surprise strike rule) against the transports, rolling three dice and hitting on a roll of 2 or better (I’m out of practice with the sneak attack at this point as it’s been sacked as a rule).  So….  SUPER bad idea.

That all said, there may be a fundamental misunderstanding of the rules going on here:

You cannot send a tactical bomber to attack a destroyer and two subs in order to kill the destroyer and then send 3 transports through in the same turn as a combat move.

All combat moves are performed before any dice are rolled.  if you want to perform an amphib assault, that’s a combat move.  So the tactical and three transports need to move into SZ110.  then, during the combat phase, the tactical and 3 transports fight the destroyer and subs.  It’s impossible to clean up the destroyer to make it legal to do the amphibious assault, unless you had some way to also destroy the subs in the same combat (you don’t) and you put the transports in harms way in the process.

i believe as per OOB rules(this was corrected in the first alpha) that subs get one shot at trns, then they get to unload, this was something that rules-nazis took advantage of, but it is in the “rules” i guess. Btw, this is not an official answer, but i dont ever recommend that as it is cheap, and a dick move.