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?
so sub is a warship too?
Sure, see
@rulebook:
Sea Units
Battleships, aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers, submarines, and transports move, attack, and defend in sea zones. They
can’t move into territories. For the sake of these rules, the following are surface warships: battleships, carriers, cruisers, and
destroyers. Transports are not warships. Submarines are warships, but they are not surface warships.
Got a G40 2nd edition home rule, need an opinion. Me and my cousins decided that it doesn’t make sense that AAA can’t fire during strategic bombings so we started to role 1 die for each AAA present. Is this sensible?
Got a G40 2nd edition home rule, need an opinion. Me and my cousins decided that it doesn�t make sense that AAA can�t fire during strategic bombings so we started to role 1 die for each AAA present. Is this sensible?
In G40, ICs and facilities have inbuilt AA instead of needing to position an AA gun in the territory. I personally think this rule change has gone in the wrong direction. The problem with one earlier rule is that an AA Gun still fired on escorting fighters. That was a bit unfair.
The built-in AA for facilities means there is always AA fire against strategic bombers on bombing runs. I’m wondering if you guys were unaware of this rule? With an AA shot against every single strat bomber on every run, it would be excessive to add AAA units to the defense.
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)
The rules say you may not fly over a friendly neutral, but also say that moving a land unit into the territory ends its neutrality.
There’s also this phrase which talks about not moving “through” friendly neutrals, but could be taken as referring to land units specifically:
“They can be moved into (but not through) as a noncombat move by land units of a power that is at war”
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)
No, because:
@rulebook:
A power may not attack a friendly neutral nor fly air
units over it. However, a power that is at war may move
land units into (but not through) a friendly neutral as a
noncombat move (see “Noncombat Move,” page 21). This
moves the territory out of its neutral status at the end of the
Noncombat Move phase.
…
HTH :-)
@P@nther:
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)
No, because:
@rulebook:
A power may not attack a friendly neutral nor fly air
units over it. However, a power that is at war may move
land units into (but not through) a friendly neutral as a
noncombat move (see “Noncombat Move,” page 21). This
moves the territory out of its neutral status at the end of the
Noncombat Move phase.
…HTH :-)
i thought that only anzac can land planes on dutch lands in ncm
