China can only mobilize in chinese territories but you can move into burma and kwangtung.
Oystello is right.@oysteilo:
I believe the industrial complex stays put since it is not an original chinese teritory. I assume china can not mobilize new units in Kwangtung, they can only mobilze in original chinese teritories
Then the rules should explicitly state “original chinese ownership”. Has there been an errata put out on this question?
I suppose it can be inferred but it is more tortured than it needs to be.
The rules say if the ic was BUILT on a chinese territory. In this case the ic was built on a uk territory.
Industrial complex on Kwangtung is never destroyed because it is an original UK territory, not a Chinese territory. You go by what symbol is printed on the map board
Alright, point taken….as long as the Chinese cannot make use of it.
Since it is a uk territory, not a chinese territory, china can not place there with or without factory
A neutral power may not noncom or attack a neutral territory. Its all over both rule books.
The Russian political situation in both Eur and Global states in the first paragraph…"This secret agreement, known as the molotov-zipperhead pact, assures that the Sov Un will remain neutral will remain neutral should Ger go to war in europe. “It also permits each power to expand its sphere of influence in eastern europe without interference from the other”
Should i ignore this or is it a special circumstance allowing Rus and Germany to take european neutrals (yugo, greece &/or bulgaria)?
I think that just refers to USSR starting the game with Eastern Poland, which it didn’t own in 1930. Perhaps the Baltic States too. Not sure when they came into the USSR.
A neutral power may not noncom or attack a neutral territory. Its all over both rule books.
The Russian political situation in both Eur and Global states in the first paragraph…"This secret agreement, known as the molotov-zipperhead pact, assures that the Sov Un will remain neutral will remain neutral should Ger go to war in europe. “It also permits each power to expand its sphere of influence in eastern europe without interference from the other”
Should i ignore this or is it a special circumstance allowing Rus and Germany to take european neutrals (yugo, greece &/or bulgaria)?
The text in italics is a brief description of the historical background. The rules follow starting from “Political Situation”.
Ok. On pg9 of the europe says the same thing as pg 36 except no italics. Does that mean its legal if only playing eur40?
Ok. On pg9 of the europe says the same thing as pg 36 except no italics. Does that mean its legal if only playing eur40?
Don’t just focus on the italics. On page 9 of the Europe Rulebook you can see, that the very brief description of the historical background ends, when it says:
@rulebook:
As a result, the Soviet Union …
That small descriptive part serves as background for the rules following after “As a result…” and does not override any core game rules.
P@nther has spoken…obey the Rules Deputy! Lol
Thanks dude
Hello,
quick rules question: what happens to China After Japan completely conquers Chinese territory?
What happens to china’s money?
Do the Chinese Return to the Game If one of their territories is liberated?
Duri
@Duri7:
quick rules question: what happens to China After Japan completely conquers Chinese territory?
What happens to china’s money?
Do the Chinese Return to the Game If one of their territories is liberated?
From the China Rules:
@rulebook:
Unlike the other powers in the game, China is not an
industrialized nation and has a rural economy and
decentralized government. As a result, China does not have
a capital like other powers do. If all Chinese territories are
captured by Japan, China retains its unspent IPCs in hope
of liberation and does not give them to Japan.
So once a Chinese territory will be liberated, China will be able to continue the game.
HTH :-)
Hi Pather,
thanks a lot. (Bad for myself as Japan) but just in time.
Best Duri
…
Two questions:
(1) Where and how would I post it on these forums? (I see, in writing this message, that there’s an option to post it along with this message: would that be the best way to post it?)(2) If I preface the file by saying I got the FAQ from here, including the URL, do I have permission to also post it on BoardGameGeek in the A&A 1940 forums over there?
Welcome to the forum, PlasticAttack, and I think you have earned all our respect for this undertaking. :-)
I am going to send you a PM addressing your questions, so please check your Messages.
P@nther is just awesome.
This project sounds very beneficial, don’t get me wrong, but the purpose of this thread is just to post your rules question and have it answered. It’s not meant to be like a “FAQ” sheet that answers all the questions you may have after reading the rulebook.
The thread has worked perfectly for this purpose. You have a question, you ask it, you get the right answer. If you get the wrong answer, a rules deputy or Krieghund himself comes along within hours, usually, and gets you the correct answer.
This is not directed at you, Mr. PlasticAttack, but at those over the months who complain about the voluminous nature of this thread. I’m just trying to explain that it’s not really designed for ease of reading, and redundant questions are FINE. We don’t expect people to read this thread from the beginning.
Good point, Gamerman. That indeed is the purpose of this thread. It is not a wiki!
First off…damn there is a lot of redundant q & a in this thread. Can we clean up some? Just a thought.
That’s been done. There’s nothing here that’s not either in the rules or the official FAQs.
In this context I remembered Krieghund’s above statement. Indeed, over the years this (and previous) FAQ-thread has been a source that added towards the improvement of the (updated) rulebooks and official FAQ-sheets at http://avalonhill.wizards.com/rules .
However, in the past some players have always demanded for an additional “Compendium” to study. So this FAQ-thread, as well as others (for example Gamerman’s ‘Mongolia and Neutrals’ thread, but other stickied and non-stickied threads, too) might serve as excellent sources for a related project. Though - until today - no one seemed to show that much of stamina to really do it.
So i shouldnt bother trying to find the answer in this thread. I should just post a question that has been asked/answered multiple times. Well maybe that should be edited into the very first post so that others dont have to waste their time looking for an answer like me and lots of others have done.
