Major Neutrality question 1936

[Johnson73]

While Neutral can Germany land troops in North Africa?

Can US park its fleet in the Channel?

Can France land planes in the UK?

If the US parks its fleet in the Channel and the U.K. Has a fleet in same zone how can Germany attack UK boats without declaring war on the US?  It does not clarify in the rules that a nation can choose which nation it wants to attack if two nations share a zone.

[Whitshadw]

@R:

While Neutral can Germany land troops in North Africa?
No Both nations need to be at war with the same major power before they can land units in each others territory other wise you are violating each other Neutrality. Only once both nations are at war do they become Aligned and then can you Land units, Lend lease etc
Can US park its fleet in the Channel?
No not until the United States are at war can they move their entire fleet into the English Channel. At 35 IPP the United States can help Escort duty on convoy lines but still can not move their entire fleet out.
Can France land planes in the UK? Yes but only when France and England are at war with the same major power.

If the US parks its fleet in the Channel and the U.K. Has a fleet in same zone how can Germany attack UK boats without declaring war on the US?  It does not clarify in the rules that a nation can choose which nation it wants to attack if two nations share a zone. The United States would need to be in a state of war to be able to move its fleet to the Channel.

[Johnson73]

Thank you, that all makes sense.  However where in the rules does it state any of this.

[Rank Carcass]

Whitshadw has it right. I have found some rule locations for you from version 1.2. So you can show your game group. Remember that all National Reference Sheets are part of the rules and can have extra information. It’s essential for you to read 0.3 Terminology page 4. This defines Capialized terms in rules as different than the dictionary meanings.
@Whitshadw:

@R:

While Neutral can Germany land troops in North Africa?
No Both nations need to be at war with the same major power before they can land units in each others territory other wise you are violating each other Neutrality. Only once both nations are at war do they become Aligned and then can you Land units, Lend lease etc
page 19 table 4-2, page 20 4.4 Aligning and page 20 table 4-3 Neutrality and Alignment. Page 5 Friendly has an example
Can US park its fleet in the Channel?
No not until the United States are at war can they move their entire fleet into the English Channel. At 35 IPP the United States can help Escort duty on convoy lines but still can not move their entire fleet out.
United States National Reference Sheet(Income Determined Actions)
Can France land planes in the UK? Yes but only when France and England are at war with the same major power.
same answer as your first question on neutral German troops to North Africa

If the US parks its fleet in the Channel and the U.K. Has a fleet in same zone how can Germany attack UK boats without declaring war on the US?�  It does not clarify in the rules that a nation can choose which nation it wants to attack if two nations share a zone. The United States would need to be in a state of war to be able to move its fleet to the Channel.
page 5 Possession/Ownership: “You may not Possess a sea zone.” Moving into a seazone isnt an Attack on all nations navies located there. In your example the us/uk would need to be already aligned by location and would defend together due to already being at war with Germany. However if the Us is not in that sea zone but the Uk moved its navy to the English Channel  (Netherlands has a navy there). If all nations present are Neutral Germany could pick UK or Netherlands navy to Attack and not Attack the other. Unless the Netherlands or the UK are able to declare war on Germany themselves at that time(National Reference Sheets), to defend each other in the battle. All rules the same as the previous questions you asked. And page 35 for both 8.1 Declarations of war and table 8-1 2.Consequences.

http://www.globalwargame.com/www/dwqa-questions/

This link is to developers FAQ. You can search it or sign up to ask questions. Or go to their sales site and ask them directly.
But honestly questions here have brought me to answers I needed just as well.

[Whitshadw]

@Rank:

Whitshadw has it right. I have found some rule locations for you from version 1.2. So you can show your game group. Remember that all National Reference Sheets are part of the rules and can have extra information. It’s essential for you to read 0.3 Terminology page 4. This defines Capialized terms in rules as different than the dictionary meanings.
@Whitshadw:

@R:

While Neutral can Germany land troops in North Africa?
No Both nations need to be at war with the same major power before they can land units in each others territory other wise you are violating each other Neutrality. Only once both nations are at war do they become Aligned and then can you Land units, Lend lease etc
page 19 table 4-2, page 20 4.4 Aligning and page 20 table 4-3 Neutrality and Alignment. Page 5 Friendly has an example
Can US park its fleet in the Channel?
No not until the United States are at war can they move their entire fleet into the English Channel. At 35 IPP the United States can help Escort duty on convoy lines but still can not move their entire fleet out.
United States National Reference Sheet(Income Determined Actions)
Can France land planes in the UK? Yes but only when France and England are at war with the same major power.
same answer as your first question on neutral German troops to North Africa

If the US parks its fleet in the Channel and the U.K. Has a fleet in same zone how can Germany attack UK boats without declaring war on the US?�  It does not clarify in the rules that a nation can choose which nation it wants to attack if two nations share a zone. The United States would need to be in a state of war to be able to move its fleet to the Channel.
page 5 Possession/Ownership: “You may not Possess a sea zone.” Moving into a seazone isnt an Attack on all nations navies located there. In your example the us/uk would need to be already aligned by location and would defend together due to already being at war with Germany. However if the Us is not in that sea zone but the Uk moved its navy to the English Channel  (Netherlands has a navy there). If all nations present are Neutral Germany could pick UK or Netherlands navy to Attack and not Attack the other. Unless the Netherlands or the UK are able to declare war on Germany themselves at that time(National Reference Sheets), to defend each other in the battle. All rules the same as the previous questions you asked. And page 35 for both 8.1 Declarations of war and table 8-1 2.Consequences.

http://www.globalwargame.com/www/dwqa-questions/

This link is to developers FAQ. You can search it or sign up to ask questions. Or go to their sales site and ask them directly.
But honestly questions here have brought me to answers I needed just as well.

Thank you very much my friend. I was not meaning to ignore him or anyone here who has a question. Please feel free to ask I just work full time and go to School full time and its summer lol! I’m 34 and living it up as best as I can! But please no question is a dumb question if anyone is ever looking for help please feel free! Best Wishs!

[Rank Carcass]

Funny my slower answer is all that was. You had it perfectly! I just added an extra perspective and page #s. Multiple answers always help add clarity for me and opportunity was knocking lol.
Its the political process and various opportunities to build from scratch, that separates this game from the other AnA types. Truely why I enjoy it. But it takes a while to grasp the intended political movement at the start. We have made many illegal moves to discover this. US fleet in Mediterranean before at full income. Allies pay 10$ to attack neutral Italy. Etc. Really destroys the game if you do this as we discovered each time.

But we still let the Victor keep captured capital money! Adds incentive to go after the big stacks and punishment for loss. Even though by the rules it goes to the bank.

[Johnson73]

Thank you both.  I feel sometimes the rules get a little wordy for its own good.

[Narvik]

I think the 1936 start is very bold, and opens up for some exciting alternative history wars. But in most games, the designer just want to follow the historical correct timeline and to do that he needs to make rules to force the players to follow the historical correct path, and that usually makes this kind of games into scripted games, making the game a reenactment, or simulation of the real war, and not a real game with free opportunities and free decisions. In the real world anything were possible, US even had color coded war plans made between 1920 and 1939, where War plan Orange was war against Japan, and War plan Orange Red was against both Japan and UK, since they were allied at that time, and this plan involved an attack on Canada. I bet we dont see that happen in this HBG Global War game. Neither War plan Green, the war against Mexico. Because of War Plan White, the domestic uprising in homeland US by commies, the War plan Black against Germany was not popular and US backed Hitler with money to make him strong against Stalin. I bet we dont see that in this game, neither.

I think the rules in a game like this need to be streamlined and general. No special rules.

All playing powers, and all neutral minors, must start as neutrals, or else the 1936 start will have no purpose. If the designer want UK, US and USSR to be the Allies, and Japan, Germany and Italy to be the Axis, he should have made the game start in 1942. Because in 1936, both Japan and Italy, and Romania, and Finland, had been allied to UK during WWI, and it was nothing that would suggest any of them would join Germany in 1940. In 1936 Stalin and the commies was the big enemy off the rest of the world. It were more likely that US and UK would make an alliance with Germany against USSR.

But, in 1939, the enemies Hitler and Stalin become allies, against all common sense, and the Western Allies UK and France prepared to attack USSR from Finland. That would have been a game changer as far as WWII is concerned. But it never happened. And we dont want it to happen in this Global War Game neither, so the designer need to make special rules that makes this a scripted game, and boring to play. I actually see no reason to play this game. I can only manage the dice, not the decisions. Then its not a game, but a simulation.

What I suggest.
Dictator players of Germany, Italy, Japan and Russia can do what they want. They are free to attack anyone, or make deals with anyone, at any time. No rules that say that Russia can only attack 3 specific territories in Turn 2, then they must wait until Turn 4 before they can attack again. Russia already attacked Poland, Finland and the Baltic states in early 1939, why wait to 1942 before they are allowed to attack again ? Dont make sense to me. That is a BS rule that make the game a scripted simulation and not a game. The only thing that would prevent Hitler and Stalin from an attack in the real war, were lack of Tanks and Bombers, and a too strong enemy defense position. The military units on the ground told Hitler and Stalin what to do, not some silly rules in a Rulebook.

The democratic players of US, UK, France etc are different from the dictator players, of course. They are not free to attack anyone as long as they are neutral. Only when one of the Dictator players attack a neutral territory, can the democratic neutrals join the war. The only exception is US, who is double neutral because its population comes from all places of the world, and this player need to take considerations to the opinion. Of course, if UK and France dont feel strong enough, they are not forced to declare war against an aggressor. In 1936 the Dictator players had a flying start on the units production and were military stronger than the rest of the neutrals, so the democratic players would have to decide when they were strong enough to declare war. Germany attack Checoslovakia in 1938, do UK and France feel strong enough to declare war on Germany, or do they wait and purchase more units before a war ? A tough decision. Russia attack Finland or Japan before Germany do anything, is it a smart move for UK and France to declare war on Russia, or do they let it pass ? Any neutral player should be free to declare war only when he think it is a good idea. It should not be like, hey Germany attacked Poland, now UK and France must declare war. What if they dont want ? Maybe the UK and French players want Poland to be controlled by Germany, what then ? Make a scripted spesial rule ? Or let the natural mechanic from the real world work ?

Minor neutral should never be pro or anti anyone, they are always true strict neutrals until somebody attack them. If Russia attack part of Finland, like the Vyborg territory, then the rest of Finland are no longer a neutral. They are anti Russia, and join anyone who is willing to fight with them. If UK and France are able to move units into Finland, then Finland join the Allies against Russia. That is of course not very likely to happen, because of the geography. But Germany is in a position to move a unit into no longer neutral Finland, and then Finland and Germany becomes allies. Of course, if Germany move a unit into a neutral Finland, a Finland that has not been attacked by Russia, then that is considered a combat move, and Finland now become anti Germany, and any surviving part of Finland will join the opposite side.

So basically, if a player moves a unit into any neutral territory, either a minor neutral or a playing power neutral, that move is considered to be a combat move. Democratic powers are of course not allowed to do this before they are at war, so no landing of French fighters in UK as long as they are both neutral. And if Germany land troops in North Africa, that is a combat move. Germany land troops in Libya, now Germany is at war against Italy, and Italy join the Allies. Germany land troops in Algerie, now they are at war against France, and UK may join the fight. Easy as that.

Now, the US entry is tricky, I believe that if no US controlled territory or colony were never attacked, US would never go to war. Exception is if you cross the US safety zone that goes across the Atlantic, or you attack any territory in Latin or South America, or you sink a US surface ship by accident, then US is at war.

[Narvik]

@R:

Can US park its fleet in the Channel?

Sea power are very different from army men on the ground. Nobody can own a sea zone. You just sail through it.

I say a single surface warship like a Cruiser, or a Destroyer, can sail anywhere on the open ocean, and visit any sea zone, no matter if the ships owner is neutral or at war, since this happen in the real world all the time.

Exceptions are canals, narrow straits and narrow channels, then you need a permit by the controller of the adjacent territory, because a canal can easily be closed by mines and artillery. Or you can sail your ship into the canal and make for an automatic sinking, like when Churchill had his fleet and the French fleet sunk at Gallipoli during WWI.

I say a fleet must be within 3 spaces of a friendly naval port. A fleet is 2 or more surface warships, and capital ships like Battleships and Carriers always count as a fleet even when alone. A fleet need a lot of supply. Now, if you want to sail your US fleet into the UK Channel, then you need a friendly naval port no more than 3 spaces away. If US is still neutral, that may be a problem, since you can not count a UK or French naval port as friendly. But, since the UK channel is not narrow, you dont need a permit. Gneisenau and Scharnhost sailed through without no permits, and they made it.

If your fleet are over seas and the only friendly naval port that is within 3 spaces is captured by enemy, then that fleet is stuck in that sea zone. That fleet can not move again before you get a new operational naval port within 3 spaces. Your fleet is not automatically sunk, its just drifting on the waves, man, no fuel.

What happens when US park a surface ship in a sea zone that contains UK ships, and Germany is at war with UK and attack that seazone ? US did this all the time before they were at war, both before WWI and WWII, they sailed Trannies into seazones adjacent to UK, hoping that Germany would sink some of them, like Lusitiania, and give US a reason to join the war. US did in fact sail a lot of Trannies with military supply to UK from 1939 as part of the Lend Lease, and this was the reason that Hitler declared war on US. To model this a smooth way, I say US, or any player of course, are fee to sail single ships, or fleets within 3 spaces of a naval port, even when they are still neutral, to any seazone as a part of provocation and gunship diplomacy. I even say that US when neutral can sail a Tranny to any other players territory with a port, and call it Lend Lease if that player is at war, or international trade if that player is still neutral, and that player receive 5 IPC for each US Tranny at that port. Â

[Rank Carcass]

Narvik
100% agreement with the scripting. We are slowly trying to increase the autonomy for the players. Cominturn was the most obviously needed. These are some excellent house rule options.

Your 3 spaces from friendly port is interesting. But will prevent Russia from amphibious assaults on South America/Africa. Etc. Otherwise I like it.

Have you tried this political option. Free dictators etc? I can see it may work.  Does it lead to fluid alliance changes later in the game? Betrayal and side switching.

Fully agree with neutral is neutral. Rather than pro anything!

[EBard5]

In case anyone is interested, I’ve also been working on some naval supply rules and like Narvik I settled on a naval movement/combat radius of 2 or 3 sea zones from friendly naval bases. Submarines and transports get a range of 5, since they operated at slower speeds which provided better endurance and range.

To go along with that I also am working on rules for oilers that would extend the range of naval units; right now I’m thinking that each oiler gives an additional 1-2 range. This would allow you to combine one or more oilers and a naval base into a long supply chain to your fleet, like the US and UK did in the Pacific. This also allows for interesting side-rules like German secret raiders who can act as oilers to supply the commerce raiding warships, or submarine oilers (the “Milchcow”).

If a fleet is suddenly rendered out of supply, either due to loss of oilers or naval bases, I say that they are not allowed to initiate combat, must retreat immediately if attacked (not sure yet if I’m happy with this), and must non-combat move towards the nearest friendly naval base on their turn until they are back in supply.

I have not yet been able to test any of these rules to verify they are fair and fun, but it seems like they should generally work.

Most WWII-era ships had a designed range of about 10,000 nmi at 10 to 15 knots (typical cruising speed). Bumping up to combat speed drastically reduced that range, down to about 2,500 nmi. I’ve done lots of calculations and in Global War 1936 each sea zone on the map is about 1000 nmi wide, so reducing the combat radius of ships to 2-3 sea zones from a naval base is actually fairly accurate if you assume a fleet at sea is doing a mix of cruising speed and combat speed and either being supplied by a local oiler at the naval base, or maybe the fleet is running back and forth between port and their assigned sea zone each turn. Then each oiler unit would represent a collection of oilers and supply ships able to carry supplies further out to sea.