Yeah, but in reality it wouldn’t make any sense.
Anyhow, it’s good to clarify.
All originally controled territories are adjacent to the capital even if there are other territories in between except colonies
And what about conquered territories adjacent to original territories, are this also adjacent to the capital?
I’m assuming your talking about Russian TT’s?
The TT’s adjacent to Moscow are
Ukraine
Belarus
Livonia
Tatarstan
Karelia.
All other Russian TT’s fall into the other Russian TT for Revolution Rules
No, i am talking about all countries.
The rulebook says that
ALL ORIGINALLY CONTROLLED TERRITORIES ARE ADJACENT TO THE CAPITAL EVEN IF THERE ARE OTHER TERRITORIES IN BETWEEN
No, i am talking about all countries.
The rulebook says that
ALL ORIGINALLY CONTROLLED TERRITORIES ARE ADJACENT TO THE CAPITAL EVEN IF THERE ARE OTHER TERRITORIES IN BETWEEN
What are you talking about?
What page is this on?
I think he’s confusing “Adjacent” with “Regional” (page 11)
Maybe its a railway within your own country, to speed up the progress ?
Are all originally controlled territories adjacent to the capital?
Even if there are other territoreies in brtween?
I am talking a bout the rulebook, chapter about move
It says something like all german territories except colonies can trace a direct line from the capital, that means that land units can jump from the capital to all originally controlled territories
???
Land units can only move one space per turn.
The rule says:
Regional territories are adjacent to one another and can trace a line across adjacent territories directly to their capital territory.
There is nothing in there that suggests that such territories are considered to be adjacent to the capital for any purpose.
Krieghund could you ask Mr. Harris about this?
In your opinion why you cantrace a line from your territories to the capital EXCEPT colonies?
Krieghund could you ask Mr. Harris about this?
In your opinion why you cantrace a line from your territories to the capital EXCEPT colonies?
I seriously have no idea what you are talking about. Where is this from and what are you asking?
The point of the sentence I quoted is simply to differentiate “regional territories” from “colonies”. Regional territories can trace a line through contiguous original territories back to the capital, while colonies are removed from the capital. The only difference this really makes is that colonies of minor powers are handled a little differently than their capitals. Since minor powers don’t have regional territories anyway, this sentence is more about “flavor” than anything else.