Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

[Witt]

@oysteilo good day.
Yes, the DD can move out of the SZ, avoiding combat.
If it declares war, Yes, a British TT can load, if it is attacking amphibiously this turn. Otherwise, it must move away to avoid combat, without loading and its turn will be over.

[Panther]

@oysteilo said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

Is it legal for the destroyer to escape even though it does not have any combat elsewhere or is it forced to fight? Everyone is moving out, but I am not sure why it is legal.

It is one of the options given by the “Sea Units starting in Hostile Seazones”-rules, Rulebook Pacific 1940.2, page 13:
" - Leave the sea zone and conduct no combat."

@oysteilo said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

Also, what if you have a transport in the same sea zone. Are you allowed to load men from malaya on combat and then move this out while declaring war? Even though the transport is not unloading during combat? I dont think so.

See the “Declaring War”-box on page 11:

“Once a state of war is entered into, all territories and sea zones controlled by or containing units belonging to the power or powers on which you declared war instantly become hostile to your units, and the normal restrictions of moving into or through hostile spaces apply, with one exception. During your Combat Move phase in which you entered into a state of war, your transports that are already in sea zones that have just become hostile may be loaded in those sea zones (but not in other hostile sea zones). In effect, transports may be loaded in their initial sea zones for amphibious assaults before war is declared, while the sea zone is still friendly.”

The exception here is that the transport may load during combat move phase in a seazone that becomes hostile due to the DOW. Usually transports may not load in hostile seazones.
However, when loading during combat move phase the transport must unload during the same phase for an amphibious assault, as @Wittmann correctly explained.

[aequitas-et-veritas]

Is a Submarine considered as a Warship, if so is it able to ignore an enemy Sub for the reason to let a TT conduct an amphib assault???

Situation is: Enemy Allied Sub sharing the same seazone with two Axis TT’S, two Subs, a DD and a CR.

CR,DD,two one Sub one TT moving out in combat Phase. Remaing TT moves out to load units and comes back in to perform an amphib assault.
Attacker decides to ignore enemy Sub to offload units.
Is this ok?
Thanks in advance!

[Witt]

@aequitas-et-veritas it is. As long as one Sub is there to escort the TT, the landing can go ahead. The defending Sub can’t stop it.

If the SZ contains a scrambling Ft or Tac, the TT could be attacked and the Sub surfaces to fight, however.
Hope you have been well my friend.

[aequitas-et-veritas]

@Wittmann thank you for your prompt answer!

[Karl7]

Hey Krieg, this is gonna sounds dumb for someone like me to ask, but has the Italy DOW against USSR, takes E. Poland and then Germany moves into E. Poland next turn without DOW and maintaining its objective before the USSR declares war still a good play?

[Krieghund]

It’s legal, if that’s what you mean.

[Karl7]

@Krieghund said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

It’s legal, if that’s what you mean.

Yes, thanks.

[oysteilo]

@Karl7 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@Krieghund said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

It’s legal, if that’s what you mean.

Yes, thanks.

But not legal in BM

[Karl7]

@oysteilo said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@Karl7 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@Krieghund said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

It’s legal, if that’s what you mean.

Yes, thanks.

But not legal in BM

Yeah, why I was confused.

[General 6 Stars]

Ya it was a hot topic awhile ago on if it needed to be changed.

[Tizkit]

Concerning the Mongolian situation after an allied invasion of other strict neutrals, I find the rules a little unclear. Some questions below:

1. If Japan attacks a Russian controlled adjacent territory, do the Mongolians still become Russian immediately as usual?
2. If Russia attacks a Japanese controlled adjacent territory or Korea, does this mean the Mongolians will never turn Russian as usual?
3. What happens if Japan attacks a Mongolian territory, but not an adjacent Russian territory? It Sounds like the remaining Mongolian territories would all turn pro-allies but would not immediately become Russian. Also, this would have no impact on any other neutrals since no other strict neutrals remain.
4. What happens if Japan attacks a Mongolian territory while simultaneously attacking an adjacent Russian territory? Would the remaining Mongolians become Russian immediately, or become pro-allied?

I noticed in TripleA that after the allied neutral crush, Japan can no longer declare war on the strict neutrals, hence it can’t attack Mongolia. I’m assuming this is just a TripleA bug and attacking Mongolia is allowed. It looks like you can get around it using edit mode to change the political relationship.

[aequitas-et-veritas]

@Tizkit here is the summary.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/20494/mongolia-and-neutrals-rules-summarized-here

[aequitas-et-veritas]

If neither of the above takes place, Mongolia continues on as a strict neutral, but

Will NOT go pro-Axis if the Allies break neutrality elsewhere
a) Mongolia ONLY goes pro-Axis if Russia directly attacks Mongolia. This would break neutrality around the world (all strict neutrals go pro-the other side).
i) Any OTHER Ally can attack Mongolia directly and this will break neutrality around the world, but the rest of Mongolia will stay neutral
b) Mongolia WILL go pro-Allied if the Axis break strict neutrality anywhere, including Mongolia

So triple a is treating it correctly since Mongolia turns into STRICT Neutral after Allies broke neutrality parties elswhere.

HTH

[Krieghund]

@Tizkit said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

Concerning the Mongolian situation after an allied invasion of other strict neutrals, I find the rules a little unclear.

As Mongolia only becomes pro-Axis when attacked by the Soviet Union, in the case where another Strict Neutral is attacked by another Allied power, Mongolia remains a Strict Neutral. This means that an attack on a Strict Neutral other than Mongolia by an Allied power other than the Soviet Union has no effect whatsoever on the relationship between Mongolia, the Soviet Union, and Japan. As a result, the answers to your questions under those circumstances are the same as they would be if no Strict Neutrals had been attacked at all.

I noticed in TripleA that after the allied neutral crush, Japan can no longer declare war on the strict neutrals, hence it can’t attack Mongolia. I’m assuming this is just a TripleA bug and attacking Mongolia is allowed. It looks like you can get around it using edit mode to change the political relationship.

This sounds like a bug to me. By the way, you don’t actually declare war on neutrals - you simply attack them. Declarations of war apply to powers only.

[AndrewAAGamer]

Thanks to Panther pointing out to me in another thread that all combat movement is considered simultaneous I now wonder if a move I have done previously is legal.

A lone sub defends an area that the Attacker wishes to use to pick up ground troops from. A destroyer accompanies the transport to the sea zone and due to the destroyer the Attacker chooses to ignore the sub and picks up the ground troops and then moves the transport away to land the troops elsewhere. Now that the transport is gone the Attacker decides to no longer ignore the sub and attack it. Since combat movement is simultaneous is this first ignoring then attacking the sub allowed?

[Panther]

@AndrewAAGamer said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

A destroyer accompanies the transport to the sea zone and due to the destroyer the Attacker chooses to ignore the sub and picks up the ground troops and then moves the transport away to land the troops elsewhere.

This sounds like a misunderstanding: You don’t need the Destroyer to support the Transport when loading, here.
The requirement of the presence of a warship is only given in case of offloading for an amphibious assault, page 16, Europe 1940.2 rulebook:

“However, a transport is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy submarines unless at least 1 warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.”

Your scenario is addressed on page 13, Europe 1940.2 rulebook:

“Enemy submarines and/or transports do not block any of your units’ movement, nor do they prevent loading
or offloading in that sea zone (with one exception; see “Special Combat Movement: Transports,” page 16). As
the moving player, you have the option of attacking any enemy submarines and/or transports that share a sea zone
with you. However, if you choose to make such an attack with a unit, that unit must end its movement in that sea
zone, and it must attack all such units present. In other words, you must either attack all enemy submarines and
transports in the sea zone, or you must ignore all of them.
You may not attack some enemy units and ignore others in the same sea zone. It is possible that some of your units
may stop to attack while others continue moving through the sea zone.”

So resolving your scenario is not a question of a time sequence but of simultaneous Combat Moves.
Transport and Destroyer enter the seazone in question at the same time. The Transport loads and continues its move while the Destroyer stops. The fact that the Destroyer stops there during Combat Move Phase leads to an attack during Conduct Combat Phase (page 13, too):

"However, units can’t end their movement in friendly spaces during the Combat Move phase except in four instances.
…

• Units moving into a sea zone containing only enemy submarines and/or transports in order to attack those
  units. (Remember that such a sea zone is not considered hostile.)"

[AndrewAAGamer]

@Panther
Thank you for the GREAT answer Panther! I learned something. :)

[barnee]

Hi @Panther

This looks like where I need to be. : ) Do Defending Subs have to submerge when being attacked by air only ? That’s how triplea does it but I want to use them as hit soakers to keep the CA they’re with alive as long as possible. I just went through the rules again but didn’t see anything saying you had too, but wanted to check.

I saw a couple things on the known triplea issues, which took me to a couple at Git, but nothing quite what I was looking for.

Wanted to ask before I open a issue.

Thanks

[aequitas-et-veritas]

@barnee triple a handles it the correct way.
Air do not hit Subs if no DD of the attacking power is present.
You need a DD to make a Sub visible or surfaced in order to kill it/them with Air.