@P@nther:
You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.
What is weird about this? It is a core principle - not only of this game - that allied territories are friendly.
It seems self evidently weird that when not at war in the Pacific, USA can be treated as though it is at war just because it is at war on the other side of the world.
@P@nther:
You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.
What is weird about this? It is a core principle - not only of this game - that allied territories are friendly.
It seems self evidently weird that when not at war in the Pacific, USA can be treated as though it is at war just because it is at war on the other side of the world.
I actually I find it wierder that the US can be at war in both theaters, Russia is at war with Germany but is not at war Japan and if a US bomber lands in Russia it can not advance onto any pacific map russian territory until ruissia is at war with Japan. Its like a big invisible wall is there. Is that Trumps wall or maybe its the Dome! :-D
@P@nther:
You get a few weird outcomes as USA too. If Germany declares on USA, USA can land planes and land units on UK, French and ANZAC territories in the Pacific and vice versa.
What is weird about this? It is a core principle - not only of this game - that allied territories are friendly.
It seems self evidently weird that when not at war in the Pacific, USA can be treated as though it is at war just because it is at war on the other side of the world.
Once USA is at war it is treated like any other power being at war. It is only Russia that is special.
The special treatment of Russia - according to the rulebook - is based on "Due to its separate treaties with Germany and Japan, the Soviet Union is in a unique position in its relationship with the Axis powers. As a result … "
There is not any corresponding background for the USA in the rules that justifies another peculiarity.
However, I understand what you mean, now.
Are the Submarine warfare rules in Anniversary Edition the exact same as 1940 Global 2nd Edition?
@Young:
Are the Submarine warfare rules in Anniversary Edition the exact same as 1940 Global 2nd Edition?
The only difference I quickly recall is that this Global 1940.2 rule
@rules:
However, a transport is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy submarines unless at
least 1 warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.
is not present in Anniversary.
UK attacks Iraq but fails to take it. It is an activated axis territory. Axis planes can land there correct?
I think the axis still has to put a land troop there in order to take control, so that means it would still be neutral.
UK attacks Iraq but fails to take it. It is an activated axis territory. Axis planes can land there correct?
This is correct. When a pro-Axis neutral is attacked by an Allied power and the attack fails, the pro-Axis neutral joins the Axis. Axis powers can now land planes in the formerly pro-Axis neutral territory.
At this point the formerly-neutral Axis power is not controlled by any other Axis power. When one of the big three Axis powers moves a land unit into the territory, control of the territory goes to that Axis power and any remaining troops of the formerly neutral Axis power become troops of the occupying power.
This is typically seen in the Middle East, when the UK does a preparatory strafe of Iraq to weaken it so that Russia can easily take it without significant losses. In the interim though, Italy and/or Germany could land planes there if the planes were within range and the Axis chose to do so.
Marsh
I think the axis still has to put a land troop there in order to take control, so that means it would still be neutral.
This is incorrect. See my previous reply to the topic for a full explanation.
Marsh
Thanks guys. I was 99.9% sure this was correct but triplea doesn’t allow it. It is an oversight in the program but I just wanted to make certain before I roll a bunch of dice for an attack that needs the landing spot.
I will temporarily edit the territory to German and do my move then edit it back to pro-axis once the planes are landed.
Thanks
Thanks guys. I was 99.9% sure this was correct but triplea doesn’t allow it. It is an oversight in the program but I just wanted to make certain before I roll a bunch of dice for an attack that needs the landing spot.
Indeed, TripleA does not follow this rule. Actually this issue is mentioned in the TripleA-Global-Map game notes:
Rules specific to 1940 the engine does not do, but you must follow:
…
(PE) You may not land air units in Friendly Neutrals, including the same turn they are captured, unless they have been previously attacked.
…
cool, thanks Panther
Can USA land planes and ground units in Russian territories on the pacific map when Russia is not at war with Japan? Does Russia need to declare war on Japan if I want American bombers to land in Siberia after hitting Japan?
Can USA land planes and ground units in Russian territories on the pacific map when Russia is not at war with Japan? Does Russia need to declare war on Japan if I want American bombers to land in Siberia after hitting Japan?
No. USSR needs to be at war with Japan. USSR has a special rule.
Yes Russia has to declare war on Japan so that USA bombers can land in East Russia (Siberia)
Japan has no scrambling units available to sz 6. Japan has a few subs in sz 6, but no surface warships. USA can move in an american sub and loaded transports to sz 6. In this case an ampibious assult is allowed because no units can scramble and the transport is escorted by a warship (submarine), correct?
Yes
Yes
but only if the attacking units and transport survive the battle
There is no sea battle. The rule behind the given scenario is about the enemy submarines being ignored by the attacker:
@rulebook:
However, a transport is not allowed to offload land units for an amphibious assault in a sea zone containing 1 or more ignored enemy submarines unless at
least 1 warship belonging to the attacking power is also present in the sea zone at the end of the Combat Move phase.
so sub is a warship too?
