Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition

As you state, the Declaration of War, or who declared first, makes no difference when it comes to Mongolia. All that matters is what area is attacked by whom first. Russia and Japan can be beating at each other all day and all night long and as long as neither of them makes a prohibited attack Mongolia stays Neutral.

There are four ways to affect Mongolia’s Neutrality:

1. Japan attacks a territory that is adjacent to Mongolia that is controlled by Russia. Mongolia becomes Russian.
2. Russia attacks Korea or Manchuria. Mongolia stays Neutral forever unless scenario #3 occurs.
3. An Allied Power attacks a Strict Neutral (including Mongolia). Mongolia becomes Pro-Axis.
4. An Axis Power attacks a Strict Neutral (including Mongolia). Mongolia becomes Pro-Allies.

(Edit - revised scenarios to include other Powers)

@andrewaagamer said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

3. An Allied Power attacks a Strict Neutral (including Mongolia). Mongolia becomes Pro-Axis.

Sorry, but this is incorrect. Mongolia never becomes pro-Axis unless it is attacked by the Soviet Union.

@krieghund said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

@andrewaagamer said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

3. An Allied Power attacks a Strict Neutral (including Mongolia). Mongolia becomes Pro-Axis.

Sorry, but this is incorrect. Mongolia never becomes pro-Axis unless it is attacked by the Soviet Union.

@Krieghund I understand why you are saying this and understand you are THE official answer man. While not arguing with your ruling please allow me to explain why I responded the way I did for your consideration.

Europe 1940 Second Edition (Page 39 and 40) (BOLD added by me)
Soviet-Mongolian Defense Pact: Due to their mutual border conflict with Japan in 1939, the Soviet Union and Mongolia have a special relationship. The Mongolian territories (Olgiy, Dzavhan, Tsagaan-Olom, Central Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, and Buyant-Uhaa) will never become pro-Axis unless one or more of them is attacked by the Soviet Union. Also, if Japan attacks any Soviet-controlled territory that is adjacent to any Mongolian territory, all Mongolian territories that are still strict neutral or pro-Allies, or have joined the Allies as a result of a failed Japanese attack, are placed under the control of the Soviet Union at the end of Japan’s Conduct Combat phase. This is done in the same manner as though the Soviet Union had moved land units into a friendly neutral territory (see “Friendly Neutrals,” page 10). These territories have Soviet control markers placed on them, and their standing army units are placed on the board using Soviet pieces and are controlled by the Soviet Union player from then on. This occurs regardless of the state of relations between the Soviet Union and Japan at the time of the attack, with one exception: If the Soviet Union attacks Korea or any Japan-controlled territory bordering these Mongolian territories while Mongolia is still a strict neutral, Mongolia will remain neutral and not ally itself with the Soviet Union.

In all other respects and for all other purposes, the Mongolian territories are treated as any other strict neutral territory. For example, if a Mongolian territory is attacked by Japan while still a strict neutral, all of the other strict neutral territories will become pro-Allies.

Conclusion: Therefore, the Russia only attacking Mongolia statement, turning them Pro-Axis, backs up your statement 100%.

However, the treat Mongolia as any other Strict Neutral seems to conflict with that statement.

My reasoning is as follows: Since the wording of the Soviet-Mongolian Defense Pact is only talking about the Soviet Union versus Japan conflict (Reason A) that is why it says only if Russia attacks Mongolia will it turn Pro-Axis. The other Allied Powers are not mentioned. The second statement (Reason B) to treat Mongolia as a Strict Neutral like any other Strict Netrial is where the other Allied or Axis Powers could affect Mongolia.

Two ways to look at this:

1. Reason A is dominant and supersedes and cancels any other Reason. (Which leads to your ruling)
2. Reason A is limited to the Soviet/Japan conflict and does not override Reason B which leads to my statement.

The tipping point for me is if Reason A is dominant than if any other Allied Power rather than Russia, (US, UK, ANZAC or France), attacks Mongolia, Mongolia WOULD NOT turn Pro-Axis. This goes against every other instance regarding Neutrality in the rules. A standard is if a Neutral is attacked it becomes Pro to the opposing factions.

Again, not questioning your ruling, just trying to add my 2 cents. Thanks!

@andrewaagamer said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

Two ways to look at this:

1. Reason A is dominant and supersedes and cancels any other Reason. (Which leads to your ruling)
2. Reason A is limited to the Soviet/Japan conflict and does not override Reason B which leads to my statement.

The first way is correct, as indicated by the phrase, “In all other respects and for all other purposes”.

The tipping point for me is if Reason A is dominant than if any other Allied Power rather than Russia, (US, UK, ANZAC or France), attacks Mongolia, Mongolia WOULD NOT turn Pro-Axis. This goes against every other instance regarding Neutrality in the rules. A standard is if a Neutral is attacked it becomes Pro to the opposing factions.

Yes, that’s true, but Mongolia is an exceptional case. Its ties to the USSR against Japan are so strong that an attack upon it by another Allied power would not change its stance to pro-Axis, and it would remain strict neutral. The same is true if an Allied power attacks another strict neutral.

BTW thanks to @manwithaplan for asking this question! I have never actually had this scenario occur for me in a game where Mongolia would turn pro-axis but apparently I would have done it incorrectly if it had.

@krieghund said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

@andrewaagamer said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

Two ways to look at this:

1. Reason A is dominant and supersedes and cancels any other Reason. (Which leads to your ruling)
2. Reason A is limited to the Soviet/Japan conflict and does not override Reason B which leads to my statement.

The first way is correct, as indicated by the phrase, “In all other respects and for all other purposes”.

Ahhh, I didn’t put enough emphasis on “In all other respects and for all other purposes”. That makes more sense to me now.

The tipping point for me is if Reason A is dominant than if any other Allied Power rather than Russia, (US, UK, ANZAC or France), attacks Mongolia, Mongolia WOULD NOT turn Pro-Axis. This goes against every other instance regarding Neutrality in the rules. A standard is if a Neutral is attacked it becomes Pro to the opposing factions.

Yes, that’s true, but Mongolia is an exceptional case. Its ties to the USSR against Japan are so strong that an attack upon it by another Allied power would not change its stance to pro-Axis, and it would remain strict neutral. The same is true if an Allied power attacks another strict neutral.

Wow - that’s cool. THANKS for explaining that!!!