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

[Myygames]

Thanks, guys! I had that wrong in my mind, solves some issues for me!

[simon33]

Just noticed that my rules don’t have the bit about the Friendly Neutrals only moving out of Neutral status at the end of the NCM. Interesting, must have been added later.

[gamerman01]

Got a player asking if China can enter Burma before UK and Japan are at war. You would think they can’t, but I can’t find any rule that prohibits China from entering Burma before Japan/UK war status (looked in the FAQ that I have, too)

It looks like all the rules regarding China/UK/Japan and at war issues are that Allies entering or flying over China is considered an act of war by Japan, but not vice-versa.

Am I missing something? It seems wrong that China and UK can share a territory when UK is not at war with Japan. Thanks

[Panther]

@gamerman01

No, you don’t miss anything.

China and UK are allied from the beginning of the game. The Burma (and Kwangtung)-exception allows Chinese movement into (only) these (allied) UK territories. That is the rule that is part of the “China Rules” and this is totally independent from any status of war/political situation between UK and Japan or whomever, as you pointed out correctly.

So this actually isn’t a rules question but rather a question of “game design”, that maybe @Krieghund has an answer to.

[Krieghund]

@gamerman01 There is nothing unusual about this situation. Neither China nor UK is neutral, as China is at war with Japan and UK with Germany and Italy, so they are free to occupy each other’s territories. However, as you pointed out, UK (or any other Allied power) can’t move into China unless at war with Japan. This is because Japan doesn’t want any interference in its affairs by European powers, but Chinese forces moving out of China are not a concern.

[gamerman01]

Thanks a lot guys, your speed is amazing.
I haven’t played enough games the last 4-5 years, I had forgotten the part about UK being at war (with Germany/Italy) and being allied with China from the beginning. Then it’s not weird, gotcha.

Have a great day -

[simon33]

It is legal but it shouldn’t be IMO.

[Contango]

Situation: At the beginning of the UK turn, a US transport sits in SZ 110 with one UK land unit loaded on it during a prior turn. SZ 110 is adjacent to both United Kingdom and Normandy Bordeaux territories, both of which are allied owned. United Kingdom has an additional UK land unit in it. At least one of the two UK land units mentioned is an infantry.

Question: During the same UK non-combat phase, can the UK land unit starting in United Kingdom load onto the US transport whilst the UK land unit starting on the US transport offloads into Normandy Bordeaux?

Bonus Question 1: If the answer above is “yes”, would it still be “yes” if the UK land unit starting on the US transport offloads into United Kingdom?

Bonus Question 2: If the answer to the first question is “yes”, would it still be yes if neither of the UK land units were infantry? (is the spirit of the rules that loading always happens first and hence would not be allowable because two non-infantry units would be aboard the transport together, or could the offload be seen as happening first?)

[Krieghund]

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

Question: During the same UK non-combat phase, can the UK land unit starting in United Kingdom load onto the US transport whilst the UK land unit starting on the US transport offloads into Normandy Bordeaux?

The rules say that allied units must remain on the transport for a round before offloading, even if the transport doesn’t have to move, strongly implying that the transport “moves within the sea zone” during the ally’s turn between the moving power’s turns. Applying that principle disallows a move such as this.
Yes, but loading must occur before offloading, as offloading disallows any further activity on/by the transport during the turn.

Bonus Question 1: If the answer above is “yes”, would it still be “yes” if the UK land unit starting on the US transport offloads into United Kingdom?

While the above answer is “no”, it would be “yes” in this case. Since the two units loaded from and offloaded to the same territory, it would be OK. Of course, the only reason I can think of to do that is to trade an infantry for another unit type (or vice versa). Needless to say, the unit not on the transport must load before the unit already on the transport offloads, as offloading disallows any further activity on/by the transport during the turn.
Yes.

Bonus Question 2: If the answer to the first question is “yes”, would it still be yes if neither of the UK land units were infantry? (is the spirit of the rules that loading always happens first and hence would not be allowable because two non-infantry units would be aboard the transport together, or could the offload be seen as happening first?)

This would not be allowed at all, as loading must occur before offloading.

[taamvan]

@krieghund

We are discussing this in our community groups.

How do you reach the conclusion that the “transport moves within the SZ”. This is also not relevant to the analysis of the other limitations in the rules.

Unit 1 UK infantry is loaded on US transport on Turn 8.

On Turn 9,
US transport then moves, or does not move
Unit 2 UK infantry (a different unit) is loaded on US transport from UK or Canada.
Unit 1 UK infantry is dropped in non combat into normandy from the US transport
Unit 2 UK infantry remains on the transport.

Units did not move before they loaded (transport could, or not)
Loading and Unloading occurred in the proper order
Transport did not participate in both combat and noncombat actions.
Unit 1 has spent the required turn on board the transport before unloading.

Two units can be loaded from different territories in the same turn. Here, they could be loaded from the same, or different territories as long as the tt move / load —unload (ends turn) protocol is followed.

The two units did not unload into different territories. They loaded from any territories (different or same) on different turns.
Only the unit that has spent the interturn on the transport unloads during noncom, ending the turn of all 3 units.
Unit 2 UK infantry remains on board.

Each rule has been followed.

Thanks Kreig!

[General 6 Stars]

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

@krieghund

We are discussing this in our community groups.

How do you reach the conclusion that the “transport moves within the SZ”. This is also not relevant to the analysis of the other limitations in the rules.

Unit 1 UK infantry is loaded on US transport on Turn 8.

On Turn 9,
US transport then moves, or does not move
Unit 2 UK infantry (a different unit) is loaded on US transport from UK or Canada.
Unit 1 UK infantry is dropped in non combat into normandy from the US transport
Unit 2 UK infantry remains on the transport.

Units did not move before they loaded (transport could, or not)
Loading and Unloading occurred in the proper order
Transport did not participate in both combat and noncombat actions.
Unit 1 has spent the required turn on board the transport before unloading.

Two units can be loaded from different territories in the same turn. Here, they could be loaded from the same, or different territories as long as the tt move / load —unload (ends turn) protocol is followed.

The two units did not unload into different territories. They loaded from any territories (different or same) on different turns.
Only the unit that has spent the interturn on the transport unloads during noncom, ending the turn of all 3 units.
Unit 2 UK infantry remains on board.

Each rule has been followed.

Thanks Kreig!

Dam. I’m gonna need a lawyer soon ! Lol

[Krieghund]

@taamvan OK, I’ve discussed this with Larry. I have apparently erred on the side of “realism”. While my answer made sense from that point of view, it over-complicates the rules in play. To keep the rule simple, moving units using an ally’s transport is in effect the same as moving them with your own, with the exceptions that a) they must be offloaded on a later turn than when they were loaded, and b) the transport moves on its owner’s turn, if at all. I will amend my answers above accordingly.

[taamvan]

@krieghund

I appreciate the conversation and answer, and look forward to further discussions, questions, and someday–a game with you.

[matttodd1]

I’ve never seen it done, but can you build a minor factory on New Zealand? Is New Zealand an “Island” as defined in the game?

The rulebook states:
Industrial complexes can’t be built on islands (see “Islands,” page 8 ) (this is on page 24, 4th paragraph of the Pacific rulebook under “Industrial Complexes and Bases (Facilities)”.

On page 8, I find:
“An island or island group is a single territory surrounded entirely by one or more sea zones. A sea zone can contain at most one island or island group, which is considered one territory.”

Technically speaking, on the game board New Zealand is not “surrounded entirely by one or more sea zones”, as the bottom portion of New Zealand runs into the bottom of the edge of the game board.

So what’s the intent? Could someone build a factory on New Zealand?

I’d love an authoritative answer from Krieghund, if he has time.

Thanks!

[Krieghund]

@matttodd1 How about an authoritative answer from the FAQ?

Q. Is New Zealand an island?
A. Yes. Even though it touches the edge of the map, it is an island territory because it touches only a single sea zone and no other territory.

[matttodd1]

@Krieghund Thanks!

[barnee]

JPN does a DOW on UK and ANZAC Rd 2.

Can USA then DOW on Rd 2 during the Political Phase allowing them to Attack anyone they did DOW on that turn ?

The European Rules seem to say USA can’t.

The United States may not declare war on any Axis
power unless an Axis power either declares war on it first
or captures London or any territory in North America,
after which it may declare war on any or all Axis powers
on its following turn. However, on turn 3, Japan will
awaken the sleeping giant at Pearl Harbor, and the United
States may declare war on any or all Axis powers at the
beginning of the Collect Income phase of that turn if
it has not done so already.

Is that the same for Global ?

Thanks

[simon33]

Eur rules, p37
“Political Situation: The United States begins the game at war with no one. In addition to the normal restrictions (see
“Powers Not at War with One Another,” page 15), while it’s not at war with Japan, the United States may not move
any units into or through China or end the movement of its sea units in sea zones that are adjacent to Japan-controlled
territories. While not at war with Germany or Italy, the United States may end the movement of its sea units on the
Europe map only in sea zones that are adjacent to U.S. territories, with one exception: U.S. warships (not transports)
may also conduct long-range patrols into sea zone 102. The United States may not declare war on any Axis power
unless an Axis power either declares war on it first or captures London or any territory in North America, or Japan
makes an unprovoked declaration of war against the UK or ANZAC, after which it may declare war on any or all Axis
powers on its following turn. However, if it’s not yet at war by the Collect Income phase of its third turn, the United
States may declare war on any or all Axis powers at the beginning of that phase. This is an exception to the rules for
declaring war (see “Declaring War,” page 12), which may normally be done only at the beginning of the Combat Move
phase.”

[simon33]

You must be reading the rules from the A&A Europe part, not the global part of the rules.

Logically, if there is no Japan, they can’t allow USA to enter the war.

[barnee]

@simon33 heh heh yea that’d make sense lol

reason I ask is because in triplea it allows USA to DOW after any JPN DOW on UK or ANZAC.

I know triplea isn’t 100% rule compliant but don’t see anything in the Game Notes saying the USA can’t.

How do you play it ?

Ahh … just saw the bolded above. Hmm … missed that :)