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

[boldfresh]

The axis planes can land.  This is a triplea error.

[Krieghund]

Boldfresh is correct.

Iraq is now on the Axis side and is therefore considered friendly to all Axis powers.  Any Axis units may move into or through it, but only land units may take control of it.  The rule says only that it can be taken control of in the same way as if it were a friendly neutral, not that it is a friendly neutral.

[AndrewAAGamer]

Thank you for your prompt response.

[gamerman01]

Andrew - If you haven’t already, you should look over the Triple A game notes where most of the rule book items that Triple A does not apply, are listed

Help -> Game notes    (in Triple A)

[robbie358]

Don’t want to say ‘I told you so’…

[Young Grasshopper]

During round 2, Italy declares war on Russia and attacks Bessarabia. During round 3, Germany moves units into Italy controlled Bessarabia, but has not yet declared war on Russia (therefore collecting 5 IPCs for trade with Russia NO). So on turn 3, can the Soviet Union declare war on Germany and attack Bessarabia which has both Italian and German units on it?

[Witt]

YG: yes.
Russia can DW on Germany,  once at war with Italy.
Then it can Attack Bessarabia, which contains units from both sides.

[Young Grasshopper]

@wittmann:

YG: yes.
Russia can DW on Germany,  once at war with Italy.
Then it can Attack Bessarabia, which contains units from both sides.

Thanks Wittmann!

[Young Grasshopper]

…and if Germany moves into Italy controlled Bessarabia, is that considered a DOW on the Soviet Union, or can the Germans collect their NO peace with Russia bonus at the end of their turn?

…also, does the Soviet Union and United States enter the war when London is attacked, or when London in taken?

[Witt]

When London is captured.

No. Germany does not need to DW, so can collect the 5 NO for Trade with  Russia.

On its turn, Russia should DW, then that NO stops,; they can attack German held territories (as well as Italian) and can collect its NO, if neither Germany nor Italy has a Warship in SZ125. (The other stipulations on this NO need to be in place too, of course.)

[Young Grasshopper]

@wittmann:

When London is captured.

No. Germany does not need to DW, so can collect the 5 NO for Trade with  Russia.

On its turn, Russia should DW, then that NO stops,; they can attack German held territories (as well as Italian) and can collect its NO, if neither Germany nor Italy has a Warship in SZ125. (The other stipulations on this NO need to be in place too, of course.)

thanks

[surfnrat]

Hi we have a problem :)

USA had 10 battleships und start an amphibian assault with 1 man against 10 .  I think i read somewhere that in this faq only as much battleships can fire as inf. attacks, but if you read only the rules there is no restriction on it,  or is it correct that  usa fire 10 battleships and one inf. and the attacked country can only kill the one inf. that landed?

[Witt]

Hi Surfnrat.
You my get one Bombardment, if only one ground unit is assaulting amphibiously.
If the defending Inf hits, it hits the ground unit. Never a Battleship.

[Krieghund]

@surfnrat:

I think i read somewhere that in this faq only as much battleships can fire as inf. attacks, but if you read only the rules there is no restriction on it

Europe Rulebook, page 18:

The number of ships that can make bombardment attacks is limited to 1 ship per land unit being offloaded from the transports in that coastal territory.

[Young Grasshopper]

When Soviet Union is at war, can they move 1 tank during the non-combat phase through northwest Persia into Persia and claim both territories? I thought I read here somewhere that it was possible because Northwest Pesria has no standing army to block the tank and thereby forcing it to stop.

[boldfresh]

@Young:

When Soviet Union is at war, can they move 1 tank during the non-combat phase through northwest Persia into Persia and claim both territories? I thought I read here somewhere that it was possible because Northwest Pesria has no standing army to block the tank and thereby forcing it to stop.

no this cannot happen because nw persia is a pro-allied neutral.

[gamerman01]

You can blitz pro-the other side neutrals that have no armies, but not pro-your side.  The rationale is something about peacefully establishing yourself there - diplomatic relations and stuff.

[IKE]

@Gamerman01:

The first you can fly over a neutral is in the non-combat movement phase of the turn you attacked that neutral - that is, while Germany cannot fly over Spain during the combat move of this turn (other than to attack it), Germany CAN fly over Spain during the noncombat phase of this turn, because Spain is no longer neutral after Germany attacks Spain in that combat move with other units.

Where does it say that in the rules?  If you are attacking Spain then you can fly over it, according to the rules.  Where does it stipulate that you cannot fly over it in that combat phase, only non-combat?

Reading “Air units can’t fly over an unfriendly neutral unless they are attacking it” I interpret that as if I attack the neutral then I can also fly over it in combat phase.  That’s why I’m wondering if you found further clarification on this than what I saw in the rulebook.

[gamerman01]

@IKE:

If you are attacking Spain then you can fly over it, according to the rules.  Where does it stipulate that you cannot fly over it in that combat phase, only non-combat?

It does seem you can interpret that rule more than one way.  It means that you can fly over it only to attack it - it doesn’t mean you can fly other planes over it at the same time en route to a different destination.  We know this because Krieghund has clarified it for us.
You can fly over it in the noncombat phase because at the beginning of the phase it was an enemy territory - it was not a neutral.  At the beginning of the combat movement phase, it was neutral.

Reading “Air units can’t fly over an unfriendly neutral unless they are attacking it” I interpret that as if I attack the neutral then I can also fly over it in combat phase.   That’s why I’m wondering if you found further clarification on this than what I saw in the rulebook.

Yes, Krieghund told us.

[IKE]

Thanks.  That rule is certainly not cut and dry the way the rule-book is written but good to know the intent.