@matttodd1 Got it. Thanks for the prompt reply!
If an unfriendly neutral is attacked but not conquered, I’m pretty sure that enemy air units may land in it without enemy land units to activate it. However, I’ve had a look and I can’t see where that is clearly stated in the rules - seems implied but is that it?
@simon33 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):
If an unfriendly neutral is attacked but not conquered, I’m pretty sure that enemy air units may land in it without enemy land units to activate it.
Correct.
However, I’ve had a look and I can’t see where that is clearly stated in the rules - seems implied but is that it?
It’s just landing in a friendly territory.
Rulebook Europe 1940.2 page 11:
“Unfriendly Neutrals
…
When a neutral territory is invaded, it’s no longer considered
neutral and immediately becomes hostile to the alliance
of the power that attacked it and friendly to the opposing
alliance.
…
If the attack upon the formerly neutral territory is unsuccessful
(the territory is not captured), any remaining defending units
stay in the territory but can’t move. The territory remains
uncontrolled (place a national control marker on it face
down to indicate its new status) but is considered friendly to
powers on the side it’s now allied with. Units belonging to
those powers can move into it and take control of it and its
remaining units in the same way as if it were a friendly neutral.”
That could be more clearly written IMO.
@simon33 Note that while air units on the side of the formerly neutral territory may now land in it, they cannot take control of it. Land units are required for that.
This has probably been asked before but had questions about neutrality restrictions and purchases.
Yes.
It can on the Pacific map, but not on the Europe map (unless also at war with Germany or Italy).
As it cannot declare war until the Collect Income phase, it is still restricted.
Its industrial complexes are upgraded immediately when it enters a state of war, so they can be used on its first turn after another power declares war on it.
G1 - two subs attack SZ 109. UK scrambles 3 fighters into 109 to try to take out the subs.
Germany attacks first and hits - destroyer is removed from board. Lets say UK misses all or one hit - now the battle is over since planes can’t hit subs without destroyer present.
What happens to the UK transport in this situation since there was a scramble? Does it go down with the destroyer or do the scrambled fighters keep it alive?
UK sends transport/destroyer from Canada to SZ 109 and rather than ignore and land troops, destroyer initiates attack with the support of fighters. Lets say subs get a hit, so destroyer is gone. If transport is still alive, are they still barred from offloading (since destroyer gone and no longer escorting) even though sub/s submerged to end scramble battle? Or does the transport go down with the destroyer?
No scramble. Destroyer and sub/s take each other out. What happens to transport?
The transport is lost, as subs remain with no opposition.
Assuming that United Kingdom and Scotland are still held by the UK, the transport should be moving in noncombat movement, so this question is moot. However, if this were an amphibious assault, the transport, being an attacker, would be able to retreat if it survived the first round of combat. Note that if all of the defending subs either submerge or are destroyed, there would be nothing to retreat from.
Nothing, as the battle is over (assuming the transport itself was not hit during the battle).
Can Japan NCM into German held, originally soviet territory on the Europe map when not at war with USSR? I think so.
@simon33 It cannot. While not at war with Soviet Union, Japan must treat it as a neutral power. This means it cannot enter either original Soviet territories or Soviet-controlled territories on either map. See page 36 of the Pacific Rulebook.
@Krieghund Can you amplify that answer? It can’t attack Soviet territory but I don’t see why it can’t move in to a German owned territory, even if originally Soviet.
“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, if the Soviet Union is at war with Axis powers on only one map, it is still under the restrictions of being a neutral power (see “Powers Not at War with One Another,” page 14) on the other map, and Axis powers on the other map are also still under those restrictions regarding the Soviet Union on both maps. For example, a state of war with only Japan lifts the neutrality restrictions from the Soviet Union on the Pacific map only, and allows Japanese units to attack or fly over Soviet-controlled territories on either map. However, the Soviet Union is still restricted on the Europe map, and Germany and Italy must still treat the entire Soviet Union as a neutral power, and may not move units into or through any original Soviet territories or Soviet-controlled territories. At the same time, Allied powers may move units into or through Pacific original Soviet territories and Soviet-controlled territories, but not European ones.”
@simon-tressel But the problem is that rule doesn’t activate in the scenario that an European former soviet territory is owned by Germany or Italy. Or I can’t see how it does.
“Axis powers on the other map are also still under those restrictions regarding the Soviet Union on both maps… and may not move units into or through any original Soviet territories or Soviet-controlled territories.”
@simon-tressel said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):
“Axis powers on the other map are also still under those restrictions regarding the Soviet Union on both maps… and may not move units into or through any original Soviet territories or Soviet-controlled territories.”
Where is this quote from? A search of both rulebooks doesn’t find it.
I just edited out the bit in the middle with the example and added the emphasis. It’s from the same paragraph as above.
Hmm, my rules omit the bit about original soviet territories.
@simon33 said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):
Hmm, my rules omit the bit about original soviet territories.
It’s been part of the rulebooks since 2013 (see copyright date/year on the back).
Always get the latest versions here:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/18546/global-1940-2-rules-available-for-download
Hi all,
Here’s my rules question:
Is it legal to declare an attack with fighters that depends on a newly placed carrier for its landing zone?
For example, say Italy has two fighters on Rome, and there’s a UK destroyer in SZ 98. If Italy buys a carrier at the start of their turn, can the fighters do combat in 98 and land on the newly purchased carrier in SZ 97?
Thanks
