Russian neutraliy

Russia can’t do that. As per Krieghund, Russia being at war with Japan still requires it to maintain neutrality on the Europe Map.

The CORRECT response to this question is two fold, and entirely depends on WHAT VERSION of the game of Global you are playing.

1.  Are you playing the Out of Box version you bought in the store?

2.  Or are you playing with the Larry Harris alpha setups and rule changes?

1. If you are playing the OOB Version  As per Kreighund’s ruling regarding the ability of Russian Fighters to land in England when not at war with Germany, but at war with Japan, YES you may land in NW Persia.

2. If you are playing the Alpha versions, NO.  As per this added rule:

“3. If the Soviet Union is at war with Axis powers on only one map, it is still under the restrictions of being a neutral power. In other words, war with Japan lifts those restrictions from the USSR on the Pacific map only, and war with Germany and/or Italy lifts those restrictions on the Europe map only.”

@Gargantua:

1. If you are playing the OOB Version  As per Kreighund’s ruling regarding the ability of Russian Fighters to land in England when not at war with Germany, but at war with Japan, YES you may land in NW Persia.

That ruling was made before it was decided that this issue would be corrected in the errata.  The official stance on this issue for the box rules was changed several weeks ago and is now is the same as in Alpha.

@Frontovik:

and say germany invades soviet-union, do they british fighters on northwest persia count as ‘allied units on russian soil’? (for the archangel objective)

No.  Only Allied units in original Soviet territories count.

@Frontovik:

or if russia didn’t declare war, may british troops still enter soviet-union?

No.

That ruling was made before it was decided that this issue would be corrected in the errata.  The official stance on this issue for the box rules was changed several weeks ago and is now is the same as in Alpha.

Would be? Stances?  No offense, but stances change, hence the stance changing from the rulebook in the first place.  Can we get an official ruling then, that the OOB ruleset should be completed tossed in the garbage, and that both rulebooks for EUR and PAC 40 should be burned?  And post it online at the WOTC site?  even if it gets updated here and there a few times?

I made my response VERY clear, asking if Frontovik was using OOB setup, or Alpha setup?  OOB setup implies what he bought in the store, Alpha impies any current changes.

That is however, unless you are implying that the Alpha Setup WILL NOT BE PART OF THE ERATTA?!?!?!

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/prod/europe1940

Albeit Krieghund that you are an insider, No Errata has been officially posted, and absolutely no distribution to the consumers of the game has been made implicating ANY changes - save a few private websites about the game.  With no support/errata posted on the website, how are people supposed to know what to do besides  what’s read in the rulebook, and without knowing, though I appreciate the stance will change, how can you expect people to use and enforce that rule unless they recieve/get an official written rule?

So in context, from what can be read from the rulebook that came with the game, the lack of errata on the site, per your own previous interpetation, and in terms of frotovik’s interpetation - he is correct, as is my answer, and as is your original answer.  Depending on whether not Alpha setup + rules, or OOB setup + rules are used.

That said, the only other way to look at it, is that ALL alpha + rules should be used now, and that under no condition should anyone play by the rules that came OOB.  Is that right?  And we should under no condition clarify as the public, when answering questions on this site, any issues relating to OOB rules, because they are wholly overruled by the ever changing Alpha?

I can certainly understand your frustration on this point.  It was decided that no FAQ/errata would be officially published until Alpha is completed.  However, there were certain errors in the Rulebook that will be corrected no matter what happens with Alpha.  This leaves us with three current “versions” of the game: the published rules, the definite amendments to the published rules, and the possible amendments to the published rules (Alpha).  As such, it will need to be up to the individual as to which version he/she plays until such time as the FAQ is published, therefore the “correct” answer varies case by case.

This particular rule falls into the second category.  It will change.

I agree that not having the definite amendments officially published anywhere makes things awkward for players of the game, as basically the only source of such information is here or on Larry’s site.  Up to now, I have assumed that people on this site preferred to play by the intended rules, but I will no longer make that assumption.

Until the FAQ is published, the truly “correct” answer to many questions may be “x is the way it is in the Rulebook, y is the way it will be in the errata, and z is the way it is in Alpha”.  It ain’t pretty, but that’s the way it is right now.