Marshmallow of War, Midnight_Reaper, and P@nther are correct. TripleA is handling this situation incorrectly.
Those who disagree….show me the rule…I have read said rule and this scenario is no where to be found
I want this enigmatic paradigm answered for when I play among my friends
As I read it…this is a legal Russian move…undetermined by the rules
All rules say Powers not at war…meaning peaceful territory
This territory is at war
Show me the rule not your perception of the rule and I am not saying this in arrogance or by being a butt-head…I want this rule to be clear with me
Those who disagree….show me the rule…I have read said rule and this scenario is no where to be found
Midnight Reaper did quote the rule in like the 3rd post.
Pg 14 (from my Pacific 2nd edition book)
blow up box in top left corner:
“Powers Not at War with One Another”
3rd paragraph
Combat: A power can’t attack a territory controlled by or containing units belonging to a power with which it is not at war.
I’ve been quoting from the rule book. Read the “The Political Situation” section, “The Soviet Union” subsection, on page 9 and “Powers Not at War with One Another” section on page 15, from the Europe 1940 rule book. That’s where you will find what we’ve been quoting to you.
-Midnight_Reaper
Those rules do not apply in this scenario
The Soviet Union was attacked by Italy….both Germany and Russia did not declare war with each other on their turns
That territory is AT WAR
That territory is a Russian territory
Powers not at war applies to say Sweden…this is not the case
I have read these rules over and over and over and none are applicable to this scenario…NONE
Again…this was an originally controlled Russian territory…2 Italy declared war…Germany did not…Russia ONLY declared war on Italy and did not with the Germans and in fact Germans made sure not to declare war on Russia to collect it’s bonus
Folks…the rules do not indicate how to handle this properly
Based on what I read this makes it a legal Russian move
In fact Russian and Germans are actually friendly Neutrals in this scenario
Those rules do not apply in this scenario
Then which rules would apply? The rule books for Global 1940 are Europe 1940 and Pacific 1940. I’m quoting right out of the Europe 1940 rule book. If the rules from Europe 1940 don’t apply, which ones do?
The Soviet Union was attacked by Italy….both Germany and the USSR did not declare war with each other on their turns
True. Italy attacked the Soviets. And Germany is not required to declare war on the USSR just because Italy did.
That territory is AT WAR
Yes, it is. All of the territories in the USSR are at war with Italy once Italy declares war.
That territory is a Russian territory
No, it’s not. It was once Russian but once Italy took it from the USSR it became Italian territory.
Powers not at war applies to say Sweden….this is not the case
If the Power of Germany and the Power of the USSR aren’t at war, which rules would apply? If they are at War, then we have no reason to discuss this, so I would figure those rules would apply in this case.
I have read these rules over and over and over and none are applicable to this scenario….NONE
I can’t help that. All I can do is explain the rules as I see them.
Again….this was an originally controlled Russian territory…2 Italy declared war…Germany did not…Russia ONLY declared war on Italy and did not with the Germans and in fact Germans made sure not to declare war on Russia to collect it’s bonus
To break this down: Yes, East Poland was held by the USSR at the start of the game. Italy did declare war. Germany did not declare war. The USSR is at war with Italy and not (yet) at war with Germany. Germany tried to pull a fast one by reinforcing the Italian territory of East Poland without further insults to the dignity of the USSR. Germany was eligible to collect its bonus.
Folks….the rules do not indicate how to handle this properly
Sure the rules do: Either declare war on Germany and attack both the German and the Italian defenders of the Italian territory of East Poland or leave it alone.
Based on what I read this makes it a legal Russian move
The only way you can retreat, according to the rules, is to combat move into an attack and then to call off said attack. Defenders don’t retreat. Full Stop. So, you have two legal moves when it comes to East Poland - declare war on Germany and attack both the German and the Italian defenders of East Poland, or leave them be.
Although, perhaps what you should be thinking about is how everybody else in this forum, to include official rule moderators, are all saying the same things. Either everyone else is wrong or you have misunderstood the rules and then dug in your heels when corrected. But when Krieghund thinks you’ve misunderstood a rule, then you’ve misunderstood a rule.
My 2 IPCs
-Midnight_Reaper
Midnight reaper
Italy owns East Poland……Russia is attacking a territory that belonged to them…you are indicating territories like Sweden with your rules that are in the book and which I have read over and over and over…this is not the case
Germany and Russia are Friendly Neutrals
If Germany goes into Finland…they collect the income and the Infantry
Only difference here is Russia may not turn the German units into Russian…but it sure can collect the IPC lost and give the option of a German withdrawal or a deceleration of war by Germany
People can be wrong…I am not saying I am right or wrong…I am saying the rules in the book do not apply here because so many things are different here than say Bulgaria or Sweden or Yugoslavia
reading the rules…I can not find where this is an illegal move because it is not indicated or specified
That territory is AT WAR
Territories cannot be at war. Only powers can be at war. Search the rules - you won’t find a reference to “at war” that is applied to anything other than a power.
That territory is a Russian territory
It was originally (and will be again, if liberated) - for now it’s Italian.
Powers not at war applies to say Sweden….this is not the case
Sweden is not a power - it’s a territory. The powers in the game are the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, ANZAC, China, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan. The rules Midnight_Reaper quoted are titled “Powers Not at War with One Another”. In your example, Germany and the USSR fit that description.
I have read these rules over and over and over and none are applicable to this scenario….NONE
Please read them again with the above in mind. They should make more sense. I hope this helps.
Germany and Russia are Friendly Neutrals
They are not. The term “friendly neutral” (or “unfriendly neutral”) can only apply to a territory, not a power. Powers are only neutral when they are at war with no one. Once they’re at war with any power, they’re no longer neutral. They can, however, be not yet at war with a power on the other side, which is where Germany and the USSR find themselves in your scenario.
Turn 1 no JDOW….US moves Philippines fleet into 54 with ANZAC fleet…ANZAC declare war turn 1…turn 2 Japanese attack SZ 54…but will only fight the ANZAC fleet not the combined fleet…it’s the same thing except on land
semantics on power and territory when it comes to East Poland
East Poland is a territory occupied by a combat won by Italians
Germany and Russia are Powers not at war
Russian political situation says an Axis power (singular)
East Poland is Italian and at war with Italy German troops are only visitors…they have no significance to the territory
Russia is allowed to combat the Italians
Theoretically Germany may allow Russians to stage in Romania so they can attack Yugoslavia because it became an Italian territory turn 1
Leather. Look at it this way. I do see your point. Dont know if Rule apples to a sea zone. But if UK is at war with Germany and US is not at war with Germany but both allies navy is in same sea zone. Germany attacks UK only because US not at war with Germany so now Germany wins sea battle and now you have 2 countries in same sea zone that can look at each other.
I see your point with ground territory. But u are not really contesting Italy. You are contesting the territory. So basically you cannot Attack Italy alone because then you would have 2 countries controlling 1 territory. Yes your point is Germany should have to retreat. But they dont so you got to attack both for control of territory.
Been many complaints over the years with some rules conflict with one another and not clarify with updated rules.
Ok to stay in same sea zone but not a land territory. Just right that in rules.
Or better yet Italy loses territory and icps but now nobody controls East Poland but now u force Germany to declare war if they want territory or leave or just do nothing and now force Russia to do something on there turn.
SS
Yeah…I mean how many bennies does Germany need as Russia keeps getting neutered?
My point to this thread is…this is NOT covered in the rule book
People are responding based on perception as am I…you say tomato I say thamato…lol
Those who wrote the rules probably never anticipated this happening
Just like Taranto Raid was probably never anticipated so the Italian set up is idiotic in my opinion
As stated by many, this game needs a deluxe edition as YG calls it (and I love the name) and a Global rule book of it’s own
Turn 1 no JDOW….US moves Philippines fleet into 54 with ANZAC fleet…ANZAC declare war turn 1…turn 2 Japanese attack SZ 54…but will only fight the ANZAC fleet not the combined fleet…it’s the same thing except on land
semantics on power and territory when it comes to East Poland
East Poland is a territory occupied by a combat won by Italians
Germany and Russia are Powers not at warRussian political situation says an Axis power (singular)
East Poland is Italian and at war with Italy German troops are only visitors…they have no significance to the territory
Russia is allowed to combat the ItaliansTheoretically Germany may allow Russians to stage in Romania so they can attack Yugoslavia because it became an Italian territory turn 1
Attacking a sea zone is not the same as attacking a territory – when you attack a territory, you attack everything in it. Therefore, in the example you’ve stated, Russia cannot attack East Poland without first declaring war on Germany.
Russia could attack just the Italian units in a sea zone, despite the presence of German naval units in the same sea zone. Let’s say for instance that Germany built a factory in Greece after conquering it and then built a naval unit in sea zone 99, and there was already an Italian unit in sea zone 99. In this case Russia could attack just the Italian units in sea zone 99 without declaring war on Germany (assuming it had naval or air units in position to do so).
Marsh
Turn 1 no JDOW….US moves Philippines fleet into 54 with ANZAC fleet…ANZAC declare war turn 1…turn 2 Japanese attack SZ 54…but will only fight the ANZAC fleet not the combined fleet…it’s the same thing except on land
semantics on power and territory when it comes to East Poland
East Poland is a territory occupied by a combat won by Italians
Germany and Russia are Powers not at warRussian political situation says an Axis power (singular)
East Poland is Italian and at war with Italy German troops are only visitors…they have no significance to the territory
Russia is allowed to combat the ItaliansTheoretically Germany may allow Russians to stage in Romania so they can attack Yugoslavia because it became an Italian territory turn 1
When discussing the part of the rule book that says that fleets can be selective in who they attack, you gloss over the point of the sentence above that says that on land, the rules are different. To quote the rule book:
Land combat, when there is a Neutral Army in the territory:
@Axis:
Combat
A power can’t attack a territory controlled by or containing units belonging to a power with which it is not at war.
Naval combat, when there is a Neutral Navy in the sea zone:
@Axis:
Combat
If a power at war attacks a sea zone containing units belonging to both a power with which it’s already at war and a power with which it’s not at war, the latter power’s units are ignored. Those units won’t participate in the battle in any way, and a state of war with that power will not result.
Do you see the difference? When you Combat Move into a land territory that has an army neutral to your army (such is, in your example, the German Army is to the Red Army), you declare war on that neutral faction by the act of moving to attack that territory. At sea, in a sea zone, you can be selective whose fleet you attack. On land, in a land territory, you do not have that luxury and must either declare war in order to attack that territory or leave them alone. You can not legally combat move into a territory that has an army that is neutral to your army. You can’t ask a neutral German army to leave East Poland, because when you attacked East Poland you attacked the German Army, removing their neutrality.
What part of, “A power can’t attack a territory … containing units belonging to a power with which it is not at war.” (Axis & Allies Europe 1940, Second Edition, Rule Book, Page 15), is confusing to you?
-Midnight_Reaper
The quoted rules are very clear. It really is a well-written rulebook and is further supplemented by Krieg�s patient clarifications(although oftentimes unneeded if rulebook is read thoroughly).
Continuing to argue and create non-existent terms(�territory at war�) will only confuse yourself. You have the Official Answers response to show your friends which I assume was the goal.
Dislike it? House rule it. Simple.
Marsh
Seriously…what’s the difference between an attack on a sea zone or a territory?
They are both a combat move, no?
Especially if the Sea zone is also an amphibious assault
I know this rule has to be agreed upon in a game by all parties because there is no verbiage and all answers in this thread and my question is all based on peception
My point to this thread is….this is NOT covered in the rule book
Yes, it is, and Midnight_Reaper and P@nther have quoted the relevant rules.
People are responding based on perception as am I….you say tomato I say thamato…lol
People are responding based on the rules.
Those who wrote the rules probably never anticipated this happening
Yes, we did.
Seriously…what’s the difference between an attack on a sea zone or a territory?
They are both a combat move, no?
One is on land and the other is at sea, and the rules clearly explain the difference between the two.
Roger that Kreghund
I am going to let the cat out of the bag now
This thread is 3 fold
before I start this occurred in one of my games at YG’s tournament and General Hand grenade told us the rule, so I knew the rule
Desert Admiral and I spoke today and wanted clarification and since I had the time I posted this…
Before posting I realized since I am giving my opinions to Young Grasshopper for his deluxe edition game, that rules need to be black and white…not having to go to this section or that section to find technicalities
3rd Siredblood and I are close friends as well so to help his tournament this would benefit him as well…in fact been talking to Siredblood all day about this…I am also giving opinions and suggestions for his tournament…ie the Cavalry units and lend lease to China which will be a rule in the tournament and a few more concepts as well
Siredblood is making a card for this rule as well
hopefully those who have struggled with this strategy, now they are clear
I stand by my feelings that the rules do not clearly answer this scenario properly and perception is what drives what can and can not be done. I read this totally different than what Kreighund states…not arguing with him but I can rebuttal the heck out of it. Reason is technicalities…you have to go to different sections of the rule book to get the answer for a scenario that rules you look at are vastly different.
Logic is easy Russia gets attacked they have every right to get that territory back and rule states Russia may declare war against an Axis power…Singular so both Germans and Russians did not declare war the Germans become insignificant.
Easy fix is any Germans in Russian territories while not at war negates the 5 IPC Bonus that Germany is due
Germany already gets many bennies
Why does Russia not get 5 IPC bonus for the Molotov - Ribbentrop pact since Russia supplied the oil to the German war machine
Why can Russia not attack Finland if Finland was not taken over by Germany?
Things like that is things that make the Allies very difficult to play against very good Axis players
Trust me my games I have a ton of house rules
