Rocket over neutral terr

Per Rulebook under weapons development:

One free rocket attack per turn! Choose one of your antiaircraft guns (it must be 3 adjacent spaces or less away from the target) to launch rockets at an enemy industrial complex by rolling one die. The number tossed determines how many I.P.C.'s the player owning the industrial complex must surrender to the bank.

Notice that the rules do not say the spaces need to be a particular type (i.e. friendly, non-neutral, etc.). Thus it appears legal to fire over a neutral territory. Thus, we need to determine if firing a rocket can violate neutrality.

Per Rulebook under combat movement section; violating neutrality:

If the enemy occupies a neutral territory and you move into such a territory, conflict results…just as if you moved into any enemy-occupied territory or sea zone.

But if you are the FIRST player to move land units into or fly air units over a neutral territory, you automatically capture is with no battle. You have made a COMBAT MOVE, however, and you must suffer a penalty for such a violation of neutrality.

Firing a rocket is not considered moving a land unit (we are talking about firing, not moving the AA gun) nor is it considered an air unit. If you look under the combat section of the rules, there are two types of units listed under “Air Units”: fighters and bombers. Rockets from an AA gun are not listed in the section.

Thus, it appears that firing a rocket over a nuetral territory is legal and does not violate nuetrality.

But you have entered the neutral country’s air space with a rocket. What would you classify a rocket as… a land, sea or air unit? Use the facts you have to make a decision.

I would classify the rocket as an air unit. In my 2nd ed. rulebook (pg. 17, col. 3, para. 5[or A]) it says, “…when you fly air units over a neutral territory, they do not stop there, but it is considered violating neutrality!” Nothing in the Rules Clarification(3rd ed.) applied.

I understand. I want things to be black or white, but you accept shades of grey. SATAN! Get thee gone! :D

Why not say neutral countries have a minimal chance of spotting the rocket. Each time the attacker fires the AA gun as a rocket attack the opponent rolls a d6 for the neutral country. If a 1 is rolled then the rocket attacks are spotted and 3 IPCs must be paid by the attacker this one time. If the opponent builds an AAgun in the attacked territory and retaliates there is no cost.

Ta da!!
:P :roll: :wink:

A Shade of Grey :evil:
HAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAA!

@El:

But you have entered the neutral country’s air space with a rocket. What would you classify a rocket as… a land, sea or air unit? Use the facts you have to make a decision.

I would classify the rocket as an air unit. In my 2nd ed. rulebook (pg. 17, col. 3, para. 5[or A]) it says, “…when you fly air units over a neutral territory, they do not stop there, but it is considered violating neutrality!” Nothing in the Rules Clarification(3rd ed.) applied.

I agree that you would be correct if a rocket were considered an air unit. However, as I stated above, the rules clearly define air units as fighters and bombers. Had rockets been listed under this classification of air units, then it would apply.

I also do not think that a rocket is considered an air unit soley because a fired rocket is not even a unit at all. Thus to answer your question of, “is it is a land, sea or air unit?”, I say neither.

The rules clearly say that only a unit violates nuetrality. I do not see where the grey is.

One thing that speaks against classifying rockets as units is that they can’t be hit by AA guns. Other things that speaks against classifying them as units at all is they they for once are not represented as a counter on board, you don’t have to pay for them and they can’t fight or move.

The problem has already been solved. (See solution above.)

Okay, so if we limit our thinking to the F_alk and luckystrike’s narrow view…
At the start of the game, before USSR spends IPCs, USSR player steals all of the US player’s IPCs. If we follow the rules, USSR player may now purchase 60 IPCs of units as the rules say"You CANNOT loan or give IPCs to any member of your alliance,"(P. 22, col. 1, para. 2.)

Or you could form a new alliance and do the same thing. Still not giving any IPC’s to your alliance, but a member of your conferacy.

@El:

luckystrike’s

LMAO… :lol:

@El:

I would classify the rocket as an air unit.

@laststrike:

the rules clearly define air units as fighters and bombers.

@El:

Okay, so if we limit our thinking to the F_alk and luckystrike’s narrow view…

I would hardly say stating that a rocket is not an air unit is a narrow view. What part of rules are gray, if the rules specifically define which units are considered air units? Your whole basis for concluding rockets violate neutrality is your interpretation that rockets are considered air units. Please show where the rules support your interpretation.

@El:

At the start of the game, before USSR spends IPCs, USSR player steals all of the US player’s IPCs. If we follow the rules, USSR player may now purchase 60 IPCs of units as the rules say"You CANNOT loan or give IPCs to any member of your alliance,"(P. 22, col. 1, para. 2.).

F_alk and I are not basing our interpretation on negative assurance alone. Besides, if I were the USA and the USSR player tried to ‘steal’ some of my IPCs, I would take my beer bottle in hand, smack it on top of his head, and take my IPCs back. That’s not prohibited in the rules either.

LMAO…. I think that has nearly happened in some of my games!

Do you always follow all the rules in A&A with no “house rules.” If not, then you accept shades of grey.

It’s just a game.

But assault is against the law. If charged you would go to jail (another shade of grey.)

I repeat…I’ve given a solution that gives both sides a chance.

Why not say neutral countries have a minimal chance of spotting the rocket. Each time the attacker fires the AA gun as a rocket attack the opponent rolls a d6 for the neutral country. If a 1 is rolled then the rocket attacks are spotted and 3 IPCs must be paid by the attacker this one time. If the opponent builds an AAgun in the attacked territory and retaliates there is no cost.

Anyone remember Spain was neutral? If either side violated Spain’s neutrality Spain would enter the war on the other side.

I don’t think there is even room for argument over this. The only reason there is arguments over this is because all of you people are trying to interpret the rulebook for something that isn’t even in it. Use your freakin common sense! If you fly a plane over a nuetral country your not attacking it, right? You still have to pay a penalty though. Why should it be any different with rockets? Your still making a military manouver toward or incorporating the neutral country. It all comes down to that definition above,if you meet that criteria,you pay!

Bighill90,
Hope you got your hipwaders on! You are going to catch some shitt. :roll:

:evil: Frakin’ fellgercarb! That was me! :evil:
@Guest:

Bighill90,
Hope you got your hipwaders on! You are going to catch some shitt. :roll:

“Frakin’ fellgercarb!”
-Anybody remember the show that came from?

El Jefe
Hey, I just noticed I hit triple digits earlier today!
As dezrtfish would say, “Woo hoo!”

@El:

Why not say neutral countries have a minimal chance of spotting the rocket. Each time the attacker fires the AA gun as a rocket attack the opponent rolls a d6 for the neutral country. If a 1 is rolled then the rocket attacks are spotted and 3 IPCs must be paid by the attacker this one time. If the opponent builds an AAgun in the attacked territory and retaliates there is no cost.

Ahmm… if you want more realism in the game, then well…
AAGuns were not capable to shhot down A4s (V2s), as they were unstoppable. V1s could even be intercepted by fighters, so they probably are not the “rockets” of A&A, plus: they were no rockets, but rather the very first cruise missile.

So, you could try to make the a simple game more complicated, for a IMO neglectable gain. I advise against that. If i want to play something more realistic, i choose a more complicated game. If i want some beer&bretzel action, i choose A&A.
You might have seen, i am not such a friend of hosue rules. But if you enjoy that, feel free :)…

Waaaaaaaaaait a minute! :-? We’re starting to make sense here. Have I slipped into an alternate universe!?!