Should we make better rules for invadable neutrals? (1940)

The Play Testing has now ended.

This has resulted in the following:

"From the moment that Germany, Japan or Italy declares War on - or attacks the Soviet Union, the Soviet player receives 1 Tank unit in each round, to be placed in Urals.

The Soviet player must control Urals from the start of the Soviet players turn in order to receive this Tank unit.

If Germany, Japan or Italy are not at War with the Soviet Union by Early 1941, the Soviet player receives this Tank unit from the start of the Soviet players turn in Early 1941.

Other rules concerning this Soviet Tank unit are still according to the rules described at page 13.

This rule will be part of the updated Axis & Allies Global 1940 House Rules Expansion (expected release Summer/Autumn 2022).

All fair points. I look forward to your upcoming house rule releases!

@Axisarmpit said in [Global 1940] HELP PLEASE Axis and Allies Global Impasse:

Im not blitzing through a territory with infrastructure, but I am entering a territory with infrastructure as part of my non contact move. Lots of gamers agree variations on their understanding of particular rules?

Right. I understood you were not blitzing. I was using that as an example of logic. Please let me explain.

In your explanation of your House Rule you said “…a non combat movement can take the form of an advance into empty enemy territory…”. Your question then is a territory containing infrastructure empty or not? Therefore:

An armor unit may blitz through empty enemy territories An armor unit may not blitz through a territory containing infrastructure Thus a territory containing infrastructure is not empty

Of course it is your House Rule so you can do anything you want but if you want to follow the logic of the game I would say you cannot advance into an enemy territory containing infrastructure during the Non-combat Phase.

The split sea zone in the Adriatic is a good idea for both reasons you mentioned.

While the convoy any territory is interesting I wouldn’t be a fan of adding NO’s to convoy ability of the territories. Probably a better approach would be to add a few more convoy zones or just add to convoy ability to zones that contain a capital. Change the die roll to 1-4 or keep the same value and add a die in a capital convoy zone.

There’s always options.

HMS Victorious:

On turn 6+, if US player has only 1 undamaged carrier in the Pacific, the HMS Victorious is made available for use by the US player for the turn.  The US can start the carrier in Hi. Is. or in W. US.  The carrier is removed from play after 3 turns.

Monsun Gruppe:

Donitz created a plan to tie down anti-submarine forces in the Pacific.  Monsun Gruppe (Monsoon Group), 3 type IXD U-boots, were sent to operate off the waters of Australia.  On start of any Japanese turn 6+ if Japan has 0 units in Australia, place 1 German submarine in any Japanese naval base off of sea zones 40+, or in sea zones 40, 58, or 59.  This unit can only operate in sea zones 40+ for 3 turns of play.

thanks for the reply

don’t worry about the parade the dancing girls backed out anyway:)

doesn’t look like it would impact that much 
I think I’ll give it a go in the future

Strategic Bombing Raid. I am also wondering about what happens if your attacked buy multiple borders. Some with the borders some without. So with my first question I was wondering if the amount or borders affects the damage cap.

Well most of us use SBR, but anyway…

ON the borders, You see the fortification costs +2 for each border so it does not matter because the fortification is no longer placed on the border, its just in the territory like any other unit.

This is why i changed the rule because it because too difficult to sort out.

If you must use the old rule, what we did was roll out all the non protected borders first, then defender rolls, then protected borders roll. The defenders hits are allocated to the protected border first, then assign all hits in typical manner.

This extra step was not a ‘clean’ solution so we scrapped it and we also modeled the concept that some areas should cost less than 8 IPC ( islands)