Axis and Allies 1914 FAQ/Question and Answer Thread

If a US ship is lost to a German Mine is that considered an act of war against the US?

Thanks for your help with the movement questions, Krieghund! And thanks for the pre-US release clarifications.  :-)

So in post revolution Russia, allied units may still enter and move freely among their territories?
It might sound like there is an echo in here but this rule just seems bizarre.
UK forces can walk from India to the eastern front. Linger under the umbrella of Russian controlled territory, immune from CP attack, and move as they please back and forth through Russian territory.

Might sound pointless, but why does Russia become an allied safe haven?

Would it not have been better to just remove ALL Russian units and from that point forward treat ALL Russian territories as non-aligned neutral territories.

Or divide the Russians into reds and whites and have them fight each other.

Quite frankly, I’m more confused than ever on the neutral countries control/income issue. I must clear my mind and read the rules again from scratch.
It seems bizarre that a friendly neutral gives you no income.

@Flashman:

While neutral, can American ships

Transport Allied units

Share a SZ with Allies

Share a SZ with CP ships

Be attacked separately by CP ships while sharing a SZ with other Allies

Flashman, I think: no to Transport question,  as they are not Allied yet and need to be Allied.
Yes to both SZ questions.
As to being attacked: no. They would defend with the other Ally if attacked and they would no longer be Neutral! (All Allies in the same SZ defend together.)

@ossel:

@Krieghund:

@BJCard:

The only thing is- why wouldn’t the Allies always have Russia take control of any neutral power that the CP’s attack, since in the event that revolution occurs, if said neutral territory is still russian controlled, the CPs cannot ever attack it?�Â

Let’s use Holland as an example again.  The advantage of having Russia defend it is that if the Central Powers are pushed out and Russia ends up controlling it…

I think people are missing the fact that when you ‘activate’ a minor power, you don’t ‘own’ it or ‘control’ it…you simply use your units to represent the power’s army. Therefore, the only way Russia could ‘control’ Holland (as you pointed out) would be for the Central Powers to retake it, then have the Allies take it back, nominating Russia to control it.

Wait, what?  Russia doesn’t get the income from an activated Holland?

Kriegund seems to be saying that you cannot collect money from a neutral unless you take it by force. I had always assumed that if you defend as Holland, and win, you get to control and collect money for it.

They let you control their armies, but don’t pay for their upkeep…

@oztea:

So an allied army can prowl around in the off limits territories, or walk from India to Finland and attack Sweden?

Yes.

@oztea:

What if the allies attack and liberate a Russian territory on their way out of Russia.

It becomes controlled by Russia.

@ch0senfktard:

Suppose France invades Spanish Morocco. Since this isn’t a capital territory, no units are mobilized here correct?

Correct.

@ch0senfktard:

And what about Spain? Does Spain mobilize units in response to this event or would it remain neutral?

It remains neutral.

@Auztria:

Can fighters being transported as cargo participate in amphibious assaults? And if so, can they be hit by defending artillery in the coastal fire?

Yes to both.

@Flashman:

While neutral, can American ships

Transport Allied units

No.  Allied units are not friendly to a neutral power.

@Flashman:

Share a SZ with Allies

Yes.

@Flashman:

Share a SZ with CP ships

Yes.

@Flashman:

Be attacked separately by CP ships while sharing a SZ with other Allies

No.

@ossel:

I think people are missing the fact that when you ‘activate’ a minor power, you don’t ‘own’ it or ‘control’ it…you simply use your units to represent the power’s army. Therefore, the only way Russia could ‘control’ Holland (as you pointed out) would be for the Central Powers to retake it, then have the Allies take it back, nominating Russia to control it.

There are many factors that determine which power controls a territory when it becomes no longer contested.  These are outlined on pages 15, 19, and 20 of the Rulebook.  You don’t always have a choice as to which power it will be, and when you do the choice may be limited.

@oztea:

If a US ship is lost to a German Mine is that considered an act of war against the US?

No.

@Flashman:

Kriegund seems to be saying that you cannot collect money from a neutral unless you take it by force.

I never said that at all.

@Flashman:

I had always assumed that if you defend as Holland, and win, you get to control and collect money for it.

You do.  I’m just saying that the power that ends up controlling it may not be the power that was initially selected to defend it, depending on the circumstances.

Continuing the minor country questions, if the UK activates Albania, who gets the IPCs and are Italian troops still used to represent the Albanians?

Also, can non-infantry move to the capital without infantry if infantry are being purchased?  For example, I want to move an Austrian fighter from the east to the west with a stop in Vienna, but it is the only unit in Vienna at the end of the movement phase.  However, I have infantry that I purchased to be placed in Vienna at the end of the turn.

@Texas:

Continuing the minor country questions, if the UK activates Albania, who gets the IPCs and are Italian troops still used to represent the Albanians?

Italy gets the IPCs and places the units.

@Texas:

Also, can non-infantry move to the capital without infantry if infantry are being purchased?  For example, I want to move an Austrian fighter from the east to the west with a stop in Vienna, but it is the only unit in Vienna at the end of the movement phase.  However, I have infantry that I purchased to be placed in Vienna at the end of the turn.

No.  You must move infantry into a territory that doesn’t already have at least one if you are moving other units there.

Some earlier questions I seem to have missed before:

@Flashman:

What is the status of the US navy before declaring war?

If their ships sail into SZs contested by the warring powers are they able to participate in naval combat, and under what circumstances?

Only if they are attacked.

@Flashman:

Say the US BB shares a tt with a French cruiser. A German cruiser moves in. Can the German ship:

1. Attack the French ship only, ignoring the (neutral) US BB?

2. Attack the US ship only, ignoring the French one (or must we assume that the US is at war the moment it is attacked, therefore the American and French ships defend together?)

The German cruiser may either attack only the French ship or attack both.

@Flashman:

Also, is it correct that if a tt with a SZ is enemy (i.e. not the original side) controlled the mines have no effect on either side?

Yes.

I couldn’t find these answear on this thread, forgive me if i overlooked it.

US can share a SZ with anyone until it declares war; but if US troops land on a french territory in europe with french troops on it, and germany later attacks that tt, do germany automatically declares war? Or can US share a land tt with the central powers as well (i guess not)?

While the US is neutral, it is neither friend nor enemy to any other power.  Because of this, it may not move units into non-US territories, as such territories are neither friendly nor hostile to it.

Krieg, the rules do not say that, unless it is on another page.
On page 12 it states it may not move land or air units into Central Powers-controlled or Contested tts or attack CPs.

By omission, US units can land on Allied tts.

We all hoped this was not the case as we did not want to see US Units in Western Europe before it is at war, but the rules seem to say they could(by omission).

Please show me if I have missed this rule/point, thank you.

I believe that is the definition of “neutral”, is it not?

The rules allow the movement of land units into friendly, hostile, and contested territories (with a specific exception for minor neutral powers).  If no territories other than your own are friendly to you, you can’t move into them.

Ok
Glad to hear it, thank you.

Allright, thanks. One other question: Do US ships have to roll for both Allied and CP mines? (while neutral, off course)

They don’t have to roll for any mines, as they are no one’s enemy.

@Krieghund:

They don’t have to roll for any mines, as they are no one’s enemy.

So while neutral the US has maps of all minefields, but once they go to war these maps are “lost.”

If they US is neutral, can they attack another neutral such as Spain?

The manual only prohibits the following actions by the US:
“The United States begins the game neutral, but with Allied sympathies. While it remains
neutral, the United States may not move land or air units into Central Powers-controlled or
contested territories or attack Central Powers sea units. It will not enter the war unless either
its units are attacked by the Central Powers or it loses income to a German submarine attack
(see “Collect Income”, page 23). However, if it is not yet at war at the beginning of its fourth
turn, the United States will enter the war at that time.”

It does not expressly limit the US from moving troops into any non-contested, non-CP territory.

Thinking about this a bit more; what if the US player moves ships including loaded transports into the SZ next to Kiel while still neutral during turn 4.  Then the next turn the US is at war and may amphibiously assault Kiel without having to worry about the mines, because they are not moving into, or through a SZ containing mines.

That would mean a german transport that survives the mines could park next to britain and ferry units across the channel every turn without any worries, so long it doesn’t moves. Is this correct?