…
i thought that only anzac can land planes on dutch lands in ncm
This case is different: Holland is not a friendly neutral, so this scenario actually is unrelated to Tizkit’s question.
Every Ally may land planes on Dutch territories in NCM provided those territories have not been captured by the Axis and have been friendly from the beginning of the turn. It is only UK and Anzac that may bring land units into friendly Dutch territories during NCM to take control.
Please see this clarification of Dutch rules: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30776.msg1115406#msg1115406
@P@nther:
…
i thought that only anzac can land planes on dutch lands in ncm
This case is different: Holland is not a friendly neutral, so this scenario actually is unrelated to Tizkit’s question.
Every Ally may land planes on Dutch territories in NCM provided those territories have not been captured by the Axis and have been friendly from the beginning of the turn. It is only UK and Anzac that may bring land units into friendly Dutch territories during NCM to take control.
Please see this clarification of Dutch rules: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30776.msg1115406#msg1115406
but what about Italy and Iraq, are they the same like ANZAC and Dutch?
@P@nther:
…
i thought that only anzac can land planes on dutch lands in ncm
This case is different: Holland is not a friendly neutral, so this scenario actually is unrelated to Tizkit’s question.
Every Ally may land planes on Dutch territories in NCM provided those territories have not been captured by the Axis and have been friendly from the beginning of the turn. It is only UK and Anzac that may bring land units into friendly Dutch territories during NCM to take control.
Please see this clarification of Dutch rules: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30776.msg1115406#msg1115406
but what about Italy and Iraq, are they the same like ANZAC and Dutch?
No, they are not. Iraq is a pro-axis neutral. So the respective rules apply.
In Tizkit’s scenario Italy moves land units into Iraq during NCM to control IRAQ (and “activating” IRAQ’s units for Italy). Italy cannot land air units there until next turn’s NCM phase.
Unless Iraq has been previously unsuccessfully attacked by the Allies.
Unless Iraq has been previously unsuccessfully attacked by the Allies.
In that case Tizkit’s scenario could not have occurred:
During the non-combat move phase, may air units fly over a territory that was friendly neutral but made allied during the same phase?
For example, Itlay moves a ground unit into Iraq to take control of it. May Italy also fly over Iraq in the same non-combat move phase? (but land elsewhere)
I see what you’re saying. The question would not have arisen in that scenario - you could just fly over it regardless of it being claimed in the NCM.
@P@nther:
Every Ally may land planes on Dutch territories in NCM provided those territories have not been captured by the Axis and have been friendly from the beginning of the turn. It is only UK and Anzac that may bring land units into friendly Dutch territories during NCM to take control.
Please see this clarification of Dutch rules: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30776.msg1115406#msg1115406
Just to be clear, any Allied power at war may move land units into uncaptured Dutch territories, but only UK and ANZAC may take control of them by doing so.
@P@nther:
Every Ally may land planes on Dutch territories in NCM provided those territories have not been captured by the Axis and have been friendly from the beginning of the turn. It is only UK and Anzac that may bring land units into friendly Dutch territories during NCM to take control.
Please see this clarification of Dutch rules: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30776.msg1115406#msg1115406
Just to be clear, any Allied power at war may move land units into uncaptured Dutch territories, but only UK and ANZAC may take control of them by doing so.
Yes, as “Dutch territories are treated in the same way as any Allied territories whose capital is held by an enemy power …, with the exception of the guardianship of United Kingdom and ANZAC…” (rulebook, Pacific 1940.2, page 9).
This is kind of weird, and I think I’m just missing the obvious, but is this allowed?
Germany declares war on Russia turn two and takes Ukraine turn three.
Japan stays neutral to the West but attacks Russia and takes Yunnan. On turn two a Japanese bomber parks in Yunnan. On turn three Japan bombs Stalingrad and lands in German-controlled Ukraine.
Later on turn three, the UK wants to attack the poorly defended bomber in Ukraine with air units.
First of all, can Japan land in German-controlled territories (or Italian for that matter) as long as Japan is at war with the Soviets (and so is the European axis power)?
Second, does the UK have to declare war on Japan in order to attack a Japanese bomber in Ukraine? Not that it really matters anyway.
@Charles:
This is kind of weird, and I think I’m just missing the obvious, but is this allowed?
Germany declares war on Russia turn two and takes Ukraine turn three.
Japan stays neutral to the West but attacks Russia and takes Yunnan. On turn two a Japanese bomber parks in Yunnan. On turn three Japan bombs Stalingrad and lands in German-controlled Ukraine.
Later on turn three, the UK wants to attack the poorly defended bomber in Ukraine with air units.First of all, can Japan land in German-controlled territories (or Italian for that matter) as long as Japan is at war with the Soviets (and so is the European axis power)?
Second, does the UK have to declare war on Japan in order to attack a Japanese bomber in Ukraine? Not that it really matters anyway.
The UK would have to declare war to attack the Ukraine. Pg 14 “Powers Not at War with One Another” says “A power can’t attack a territory controlled by or containing units belonging to a power with which it is not at war.”
Japan can land on German/Italian territories and doesn’t appear to need to declare war on Russia or even UK/ANZAC (Pg 35 names them as part of the Axis and Pg 20 specifies 'Units on the same side can share a territory or sea zone)
Japan can land on German/Italian territories and doesn’t appear to need to declare war on Russia or even UK/ANZAC (Pg 35 names them as part of the Axis and Pg 20 specifies 'Units on the same side can share a territory or sea zone)
That’s correct, in theory. In practice, however, Japan can’t get a bomber to Ukraine without declaring war on someone, as the Japanese bomber wouldn’t be allowed to fly over Russian or UK Pacific territory and land in Ukraine without a DoW. The Soviet Union political situation (p.36-37) and Powers Not at War with One Another (p.15) shed light on the subject.
@Charles:
This is kind of weird, and I think I’m just missing the obvious, but is this allowed?
Germany declares war on Russia turn two and takes Ukraine turn three.
Japan stays neutral to the West but attacks Russia and takes Yunnan. On turn two a Japanese bomber parks in Yunnan. On turn three Japan bombs Stalingrad and lands in German-controlled Ukraine.
Later on turn three, the UK wants to attack the poorly defended bomber in Ukraine with air units.First of all, can Japan land in German-controlled territories (or Italian for that matter) as long as Japan is at war with the Soviets (and so is the European axis power)?
Yes. Russia is neutral on neither map, and Japan and Germany are allies as they are both at war with Russia.
Second, does the UK have to declare war on Japan in order to attack a Japanese bomber in Ukraine? Not that it really matters anyway.
Yes. You can never attack a territory that has units of a power with which you are not at war.
Q: Attacker has an AB on Gib and launches an attack on Yugoslavia and lands in Tobruk.
Is this legal since he has to fly over Neutral Spain?
Even if he decides to DOW Neutrals this turn and attacks it?
So can he fly over in the same turn were he is attacking Neutral Spain?
Mongolia:
If Japan attacks a Russian controlled territory bordering Mongolia, all of Mongolia is immediately Russian
a) If Japan attacks Mongolia in the same combat move (as attacking a Russian controlled territory bordering Mongolia), they break neutrality of all strict neutrals
b) This is the ONLY way all of Mongolia will immediately turn Russian without territories needing to be activated.If Russia attacks Korea or a Japanese controlled territory bordering Mongolia, then the Mongolians will never join Russia as in #1 above
If neither of the above takes place, Mongolia continues on as a strict neutral, but
- Will NOT go pro-Axis if the Allies break neutrality elsewhere
a) Mongolia ONLY goes pro-Axis if Russia directly attacks Mongolia. This would break neutrality around the world (all strict neutrals go pro-the other side).
i) Any OTHER Ally can attack Mongolia directly and this will break neutrality around the world, but the rest of Mongolia will stay neutral
b) Mongolia WILL go pro-Allied if the Axis break strict neutrality anywhere, including Mongolia
Neutrals:
- You can’t move a tank through a friendly neutral that you just activated
a) You CAN blitz strict neutrals and unfriendly neutrals
b) You also can’t non-com mech or tanks through the friendly neutral that you just took control of.- You CAN’T land air in any neutral that was neutral at the beginning of your turn
a) You CAN land air in a neutral that has been attacked previously and joined your side (the infantry are still not controlled by a playable power because the territory has not been activated and is not controlled by any playable power yet)- You CAN’T fly over neutrals
a) Except to attack it directly
b) After attacking it, you CAN fly off where-ever you want as long as you don’t fly over another neutral
c) You CAN fly over a neutral that has been attacked previously, because it is actually no longer a neutral even if it was not conquered. It has joined the opposing side. You can do this in the non-combat move immediately following the attack.- You activate a friendly neutral with an infantry, artillery, mech, or tank. You cannot activate a friendly neutral with only an AAA gun.
- Despite what Triple A says, you do NOT declare war on neutrals. You simply “attack” them (individually).
Beware: There are currently a lot of these rules that Triple A does not currently adhere to correctly. You are responsible for knowing the rules yourself. Don’t rely on Triple A for rule interpretation. Just because it allows it, doesn’t mean it’s legal.
Thank you guys for your quick Response as usually!
AetV
@aequitas:
Q: Attacker has an AB on Gib and launches an attack on Yugoslavia and lands in Tobruk.
Is this legal since he has to fly over Neutral Spain?
Even if he decides to DOW Neutrals this turn and attacks it?
- You CAN’T fly over neutrals
a) Except to attack it directlySo can he fly over in the same turn were he is attacking Neutral Spain?
No. This is illegal during the same combat move phase. “All combat movement is considered to take place at the same time.”
You don’t DOW neutrals - that is only Triple A wording. There’s no such thing in the rulebook.
You attack neutrals individually. So if he’s attacking Yugoslavia he can’t fly over neutral Spain.
Now I notice your question “even if I attack Spain at the same time” - so take P@nther’s answer together with mine.
I will add - since the air flying over Spain to get to Yugoslavia is not attacking Spain, it is not able to fly over Spain.
@aequitas:
The Allied Player attacked Portugal and Spain on his turn as the US and flew planes over Spain to Yugoslavia.
Doing so implies a sort of order in combat movements, such as:
First combat movement: Attack Spain so Spain is no longer neutral.
afterwards:
Second combat movement: Fly over Spain to attack Yugoslavia.
As written above “All combat movement is considered to take place at the same time.” (Rulebook Europe, page 13).
So the implied order is not possible.
At the start of the combat movement phase and before all combat moves Spain is neutral. Now all combat moves occur simultaneously.
And Spain losing its neutrality is a consequence of a combat move.
Thank you Panther for clarifying it.
if a defender scrams a ftr into a sz in which defender has a sub making the sea zone hostile to amphibious attack, can the attacker ignore the sub in round 2 of combat round if the attacker kills the fighter in round one?
Point being, without the defending fighter, the sub could be ignored. If the fighter is killed, can the sub then be ignored, or once encountered it must be fought until it is destroyed or submerges?
if a defender scrams a ftr into a sz in which defender has a sub making the sea zone hostile to amphibious attack, can the attacker ignore the sub in round 2 of combat round if the attacker kills the fighter in round one?
Point being, without the defending fighter, the sub could be ignored. If the fighter is killed, can the sub then be ignored, or once encountered it must be fought until it is destroyed or submerges?
it must be fought :-P
@P@nther:
@aequitas:
The Allied Player attacked Portugal and Spain on his turn as the US and flew planes over Spain to Yugoslavia.
Doing so implies a sort of order in combat movements, such as:
First combat movement: Attack Spain so Spain is no longer neutral.
afterwards:
Second combat movement: Fly over Spain to attack Yugoslavia.As written above “All combat movement is considered to take place at the same time.” (Rulebook Europe, page 13).
So the implied order is not possible.**At the start of the combat movement phase and before all combat moves Spain is neutral. Now all combat moves occur simultaneously.
And Spain losing its neutrality is a consequence of a combat move.**
that is it, in short terms
