@Yoper:
Put this together with the point that if Japan declares war on the UK/ANZAC, it automatically declares war on the US. Doing this would cause the ships to be in the way.
The only way that Japan can be at war with the UK/ANZAC without being at war with the US is if the UK/ANZAC player declares war on the Japanese first.
Where is the rule that if Japan declares war on the UK/ANZAC it automatically declares war on the US?
It’s in the rule book in a section that was entirely replaced by errata that does not contain it anymore.
If they were automatically at war, there would be no reason to give the US the ability to declare war on Japan when Japan makes an unprovoked declaration against the UK/ANZAC, since they would already be at war anyway.
The FAQ says Japan can declare war on any or all allies. It is clear, and I quoted it.
Can we wait for Krieghund rather than think we know the answer?
The FAQ says Japan can declare war on any or all allies. It is clear, and I quoted it.
Can we wait for Krieghund rather than think we know the answer?
I don’t need him to tell me what it does say. I’m sure he will be able to clarify what it should say, though. But even then, a post here isn’t official.
No one needs him to clarify anyway. Just make sure everyone knows how it’s going to be before you start a game. I suggest that it be made clear that Japan can only make an unprovoked declaration of war against all allied powers.
There’s another funky thing about the new way war is declared. The way it’s worded seems to indicate that a declaration of war isn’t automatically reciprocal. e.g., the US may declare war on Japan, if Japan declares war on it.
If Japan declared war on the US, why would the US need to declare war on Japan? Wouldn’t they already be at war? And what happens, if the US doesn’t want to declare? Can they rules lawyer some kind of sneakiness from it?
Jim010’s point is
The US cant declare war untill its Combat Move phase AFTER Japan has declared war on UK/ANZAC
There is logic to his argument
however, from a game play standpoint I do not think it was within the spirt of the rules.
by the letter of the rules, No power may declare war untill its Combat Move Phase and there are no restrictions preventing it from declaring war
HOWEVER! Let us examine “Special Comments and Clarifications Related to Neutral Powers”
If a power is not yet at war with another power, and there are no restrictions currently keeping them from being at war (see The Political Situation on pg. 8), it may declare war on that power. This must be done on the declaring power’s turn at the beginning of the Combat Move phase, before any combat movements are made, unless otherwise specified in the political rules (see pg. 8). An actual attack is not required. Once war is declared, all territories and sea zones controlled by or containing units belonging to the power or powers on which war is declared instantly become hostile, and the normal restrictions of moving into or through hostile spaces apply.
Important exception – During the combat movement phase following the announced declaration of war, transports already in sea zones that have just become hostile may be loaded in those sea zones (but not in other hostile sea zones). This may occur only during the combat movement phase which results in a state of war. Once that initial combat movement phase is over, normal transport loading restrictions apply.
If neccesary, this can be read to mean….If a power is not at war with another power (US not at war with Japan) and nothing is restricting that power from declaring war (Japan has made an unprovoked declaration of war on UK/ANZAC) then that power may then declare war. This must be done on the declaring powers turn. (Now comes the controversey, since Japan HAD to declare war, are they the declaring power and is this their turn that the rule speaks of? I argue that it is.) In the combat move phase before any moves are made.
Here is the issue with the “Special Comments and Clarifications Related to Neutral Powers”
When is “the declaring power’s turn”
Is it Japans turn, because it is the one “declaring war”?
or is the declaring powers turn, your turn, and you can never declare war out of turn?
REGARDLESS, this situation deals with basicly ONE UNIT on the game board…the phillipines destroyer.
Is it really being used to stunt japan so dramaticly, that you couldnt just declare war on the US also, becuase they will as soon as it comes to their turn. What are you really missing out on by just killing it.
I assume some sort of amphibious super sneak attack…
@Yoper:
This is from the FAQ that is posted on the LHGD site and is considered the official FAQ:
The United States
The United States may not declare war on Japan unless Japan first declares war on it or makes
an unprovoked declaration of war against the United Kingdom or ANZAC. However, if the United States is still not at war with Japan by the Collect Income phase of its third turn, it may declare
war on Japan at that time. Representing a switch from a peacetime to wartime economy, the
American player collects an additional 40 IPCs. This wartime economy takes effect during the
first U.S. turn in which it is at war with Japan, regardless of the event that triggered the state of
war.I would read the bold section above to mean that the US and Japan are at war with each other as soon as the Japan declare on the UK/ANZAC. Which would then mean that the movement is affected.
There is no need to wait until the US turn to reciprocate with a separate declaration by the US. The only time you are going to get a specific US first declaration of war is when the Japanese don’t attack before the Collect Income Phase of the US third turn.
I will email Krieghund directly to get him to comment on this topic.
From the official errata on the WOTC site - same as the one on the LHGD site:
If a power is not yet at war with another power, and there are no restrictions currently keeping them from
being at war (see The Political Situation on pg. 8 ), it may declare war on that power. This must be done
on the declaring power’s turn at the beginning of the Combat Move phase, before any combat movements
are made, unless otherwise specified in the political rules (see pg. 8 ). An actual attack is not required.
No where is it ever specified that there is an exception to this that allows the US to immediately declare, when Japan makes an unprovoked declaration on UK/ANZAC. The errata clearly says it must be done at the beginning of its Combat Move phase.
That is the core of my question … when is war declared by US, or UK/AN (whichever is NOT attacked by Japan), now that Japan can select which ally to declare war on. Is it instantly, or on thier turn. And this has everything to do with blocking, but not just teh american DD.
if you are playing as or against someone who is using the allies to block eachother in some sort of intertangled web of ships, blocking territories from Japan moving through….then I feel you are doing exactly what larry harris and the game designers wanted to never happen
The tricky bit about adding neutrality and ships passing in the night and all that, has been left out of every axis and allies game to date. All others start with everyone at war with their opponents from the get go
the 1940 games will be a new breed, but the danger now lies in that, if the political rules are not iron clad, some one, some how, is going to find some way to rules lawer through them.
In the broader sense of A&A these political rules play such a minor part in the game (only importiant within the first 1-3 turns) that they are almost extra baggage. The game could start like classic pacific, and Japan HAS to attack turn 1 if it wants to win.
Whats going to happen is, kreig is going to apply the rules to make the following happen:
“japan can not gain an unfair advantage by declaring war on some allies and not others”
If that means editing the eratta, fine. But finding some kind of “fools mate” is not in the spirit of axis and allies.
Accuse me of being a rules lawyer if you wish. I play to win, and have fun while I’m at it. But to win, the rules must absolutely be clear on what can and cannot be done. This is no different in a tournament. And the rules ruling needs to come from someone that is official and recorded as such.
Remember sub stalling from Europe and Pacific? I do. The designer of the games who even wrote the rules (Mike was it?) said no to sub stalling, but Avalon hiLL ignored it, and eventually acknoledged that it was indeed legal.
We need more rules lawyers to flush these things out.
I completely agree. You can’t become a master at this game, or any strategy game unless you consider every possible option at your disposal. This means that you must know where your limits are. There can be no gray area, or anything about "that’s not what the game designers intended’. It must be clear cut, black and white, and official.
Okay here’s the thing. I totally understand wanting an OFFICIAL answer, but if you ask the question on a forum where there are more people than just you on, you can’t get mad when people discuss their inerpritation. You’ve also gotta realize Krieg has stuff to do besides living in a forum so it might take awhile. If nothing you should be happy that it sparked discussion because if nobody said anything and we “just waited for krieg” like you said multiple times it might’ve got buried under other stuff. I’m not trying to be a jerk but like I said this IS a forum. The official answer will come eventually.
I refuse to believe Krieg does anything except live on these forums…
You’ve also gotta realize Krieg has stuff to do besides living in a forum so it might take awhile
At what point did I get upset that Krieg hasn’t answered a question I asked only a couple days ago? I haven’t said a single thing negative about him, and only wait his answer. I don’t care if it takes a while, because as you said, he has a life, as do I.
I didn’t mean you were upset with krieg but you seemed to be upset with others because they told how they interpretted.
Here is a link to Larry Harris Game Design website where a person posted asking the exact same questions as the original poster of this forum post and took a shot at answering his own questions. Krieghund replied by saying the poster was correct in assuming that at the moment Japan declares war on any of the Allied players, all units on the board are instantly hostile and don’t wait until each subsequent factions turn to declare war on Japan to attack.
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2152&hilit=Declaration+of+war
Here is a link to Larry Harris Game Design website where a person posted asking the exact same questions as the original poster of this forum post and took a shot at answering his own questions. Krieghund replied by saying the poster was correct in assuming that at the moment Japan declares war on any of the Allied players, all units on the board are instantly hostile and don’t wait until each subsequent factions turn to declare war on Japan to attack.
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2152&hilit=Declaration+of+war
That question was asked and answered prior to the release of the official errata. It was based on the wording in the book, which has been replaced.
The replaced wording was a big improvement, but a few details were over looked. Which may have resulted in a few unintended consequences.
It’s possible to dig up past forum posts by Krieghund that are contrary to the current rules. So, they aren’t 100% right.
I didn’t mean you were upset with krieg but you seemed to be upset with others because they told how they interpretted.
Don’t worry about him, he’s just ticked off that he’s been outfoxed on his premature Calcutta invasion and is hoping to get out of it with some rule minutia. Maybe once Kreighund confirms what we all know he’ll resort to the tried-and-true technique of sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling “La La La La La La.”
I didn’t mean you were upset with krieg but you seemed to be upset with others because they told how they interpretted.
Understood
I personally hope that it is all the units of your enemies become hostile that instant rather than waiting til each subsequent turn for them to be able to become hostile, it would just simplify this issue.
Jim is correct. An attack by Japan on the UK/ANZAC does not result in an immediate state of war with the US. It merely gives the US permission to declare war on Japan on its next turn.
