3rd Edition Rules

-Submerging Submarines. Defending submarines can submerge or retreat from combat. A submerged sub stays in the same sea zone until after combat when it re-surfaces.
-Planes can retreat from an amphibious assault. Fighters and Bombers can now retreat from an amphibious assault if the battle is going poorly for the attacker.
-Multiple AA guns in one territory. You can now place multiple AA guns within one territory. However, only one of these AA guns can fire in a turn.
-New Naval units can be placed in an enemy-occupied sea zone. You can now place any of your naval units in a sea zone that is occupied by enemy forces. If you do this, combat will occur on your enemy’s turn–unless the enemy moves its units out of the sea zone before the enemy’s combat phase. Note: You still have to place naval units in sea zones adjacent to one of your Industrial Complexes.
-Western Canada no longer borders on the Atlantic Ocean. This keeps players from being able to move units from the Atlantic ocean directly into Western Canada.
-When an aircraft carrier is sunk. The surviving aircraft on it can attempt to locate and land on a friendly island, territory, or aircraft carrier. These aircraft have one movement point to do so.

In 2nd edition rules – a surviving fighter in this scenario can only land if an island (completely surrounded by water) exists in that SZ.

In 3rd edition rules – when an aircraft carrier is sunk. The surviving aircraft on it can attempt to locate and land on a friendly island, territory, or aircraft carrier. These aircraft have one movement point to do so.

Once in the New Game menu, instead of clicking Begin, click on Options, then Edit Unit is directly above your choice of buttons for that menu.

Cool. I like German Rockets T1. But I agree w/ Darth: kamikazes (in A&A game terms) aren’t really like the real thing in WWII. Since it just means you can choose to attack without needing to be able to land somewhere, it’s kind of a losers’ option. If it was like “a FTR can attack at 6 for 1 combat, then it is automatically lost” that’d be a cooler & more accurate “Japan only” kamikaze rule. But the way it is Super Subs might be better (although even less historically accurate)…

I think the original plan in Africa was that it’d be a bold gamble for the Afrika Corps to pull off the T1 invasion of Egypt, so they wanted the forces there to be equal. Since there is no qualitative difference between units of different nationalities in the game, the actual force distribution in Africa in 1942 is more-or-less impossible to simulate in A & A. For instance, adding a FTR to the Afrika Corps isn’t really accurate since BOTH forces had aircraft. Adding an ARM doubles the ARM strength of the Germans vs. the UK–that’s not too accurate either. Same thing w/ INF. What do you do? A & A is just not complex enough to be really historically accurate & very few people would want to play it if it was! Now that’s not to say it should have NO bearing on its “subject”–WWII–that’s part of the fun. But it’s gotta be somewhat of a loose interpretation or it’d, y’know–be like 6 years long or something! :wink:

Ozone27

Hard to say. 2 junior but equal players might always end up with an allied victory. 2 medium but equal players might end up with an axis win most of the time. 2 experts and equal end up with allied victories.

3rd edition helps allies more then axis IMHO.
RR and German rockets alone might be enough, if not give germany jet power (ftrs defend on a 5). Somebody at our group coined the term piranha for a German jet fighter. Couple of those in a stack of infantry adds some back bone! No rolling 4 times each always missing, they always take a bite!

BB

Just one or two swipes with a toothbrush and the BB is clean!

he might have the PC version, and if you download that off the internet i highly doubt it comes with a full rulebook

add the person that got caputered moves down his marker on his/her IPC chart