As I read the rules on page 19 all these should be allowed, since the rules say that for Sea units the zone must have been friendly since the start of the turn.
The rules say this:
Move all attacking land and sea units in that combat on the battle board to a single adjacent friendly space from which at least one of the attacking units moved.
The “attacking units” in this case refers to the land or sea units that are being moved. It doesn’t include any air units, as they are not being moved at this point. Air unit movement does not provide a retreat route. This isn’t the best wording, so maybe an FAQ entry is called for.
I agree with your rational, but I do feel that Paratroopers belong in the game. I don’t know the solution though. Perhaps they could only be used in attacks where at least 1 other unit is also attacking the same territory by land or by sea. (I would make an exception for islands and perhaps undefended territories.)
The reprint could have re-organized the setup charts, which are not very rationally laid out and appear to just wander around the area and put the units in a different order in each list. In the better organized versions, the lists are alphabetical, or some snake around the land then the sea–but it would be more rational to have some uniformity to that, rather than just a messy list without any rhyme or reason.
As to the tournament rules, the game is VASTLY different in that setting than OOB. The NOs add a ton of money, the tech adds a lot of randomness. I think the tech favors the allies because they are well-positioned to invest in that starting on turn 1, and would probably make better use of most of the random outcomes than the Axis.
I find both games to be quite imbalanced, towards the Allies. There are no other maps where fighters can fly in one move from US to London, then from London unblockably to Moscow (over the top, 4 moves). There are more layers of buffer territories for moscow–almost as many territories in the “maze” as global. In the 42 scenario, the Germans just punch themselves out really quickly trying to fight in the russian maze. And the 5$ tanks are a big boon for Russia because it can fight Germany on even terms. You might argue that goes both ways, but in most of our 41 and 42 games, Germany has to buy DEFENSIVELY, all game–not just $5 tanks. The Allies have easy choices of what to buy–tanks for russia and fighters for the other two powers, until Russia is absolutely untakable. India without a factory is a lost cause. Both setups are an easy 5-turn KGF, OOB.
In the tourney, its a 6 turn game with less than a 6 bid for either side. The Allies won 1-2 more games than the Axis did, in 2018, under these parameters. I think the only way this is possible is for the Axis to grab Sydney, India, Karelia, and then hold those, plus the original Axis cities. They can lose 1 and still win a tie, I believe.
Not having watched the invitational games in detail, that’s the only conclusion I can draw from the available data.
This is an odd reply to a question about the rules being reprinted…