Hello,

The german player have the choice to create Vichy or not when France surrender. So it isn’t a “handicap” for him like you say, because he can choose.

For me, Vichy France is not an handicap :

-All Vichy’s income is collected by germany (rule 14.4.2, page 60).

-Vichy gets a free recruitment roll of “2” each turn (as long as Vichy posses Corsica and Southern France, its capital) until he is aligned with germany (when the allies or commintern declare war on Vichy, if they are also at war with germany, something that should happen every games).
Remember that free france and vichy france are in a “civil war” = free france can’t declare war on Vichy because they are alredy in conflict. So, Free France can’t align Vichy with Germany.

-Like I said in the previous paragraph, vichy could become aligned (= annex) by Germany.

-Also, the german player can decide to lend lease Vichy France (rule 14.4.3, page 61), when he control it.
So I think that he can build a factory and place unit for vichy ? Need to be confirmed.

I Think that the Anton Case is represented with the annexation of Vichy by Germany, when he is aligned.

Hi,

For questions about canals and straits refers to rule number 1.15 on page 10 of the rulebook : https://www.historicalboardgaming.com/assets/images/GW1936 Rules v3.pdf

All differents canals and straits have particular rules that are summarize on the table 1.1 and 1.2 on page 10.

For your particular question : the owner of the suez canal can close it to enemy nations (The great britain considers a nation as enemy, only when they are at war together). So, when you declare war to Great Britain with Italy and try to cross it with your ships, the Great Britain can decides to close it and you can’t attack the ships.

Your submarines can’t cross canals if they are closed by the owner. They can only cross straits even if they are closed, for example : Gibraltar and the Danish straits (I’m not sure for this last strait, maybe someone could clarify this ?, because of its particular status).

Also, remember that the turkish straits count as a canal.

Yes it’s right.

@hbg-gw-enthusiast

Hey,

First, thank you very much for your answer. I think that it will help a lot of people (and I) who doesn’t understand properly the thing about declaring war and the naval combat associated.
This thing is very complex and by taking a concrete example and describing step by step each actions, you explain it very clearly.

Also, I would like to say that : Unlike GHG in his video “GW36 declaration of Wars” and the recent “Channel update” of the 30th april, you are not bored by answering questions and debating. It should be recognized.

I think that, he is taking these questions too personally. A lot of people have nothing wrong with him and he explains us a lot of good thing.
But, when we are asking questions and advancing arguments he seems angry because we don’t listen to his holy voice. Also, saying “I speak with the game designers a lot, so I’m right and you’re wrong”, isn’t enough to prove that you’re right.

We all make mistakes and the discussions help the game designers to clarifying the rules, in order that they could be more understandable by the majority of players in the futur.
And thats what you put in words when you say : "I totally agree that in version 4 of the rules, we should strive for clarity on whether my understanding of the way it should work is correct. "

Finally, peoples try to justify their explanations of the rules by saying : “It work that way, it’s the spirith of the rules”. Sorry, but how could we know this so called “spirit of the rules” ? we only have the rulebook, some FAQ and errata as ressources. And, there isn’t a “spirit of the rules” categorie on these sheets.
So rather than keep saying “its against the spirith or interpretation of the rules”, it’s better to take the time to explain or if necessary, correct the formulation of the rules, making an errata, etc …

@hbg-gw-enthusiast

I agree with want you say !

I know GHG is doing an important task by answering a thousand of questions, I’m the first to say that he is very helpfull : “he explains us a lot of good thingS” (I should not forget the “s” there).

I was just pointing that his reaction wasn’t appropriate, nor helpfull for the community, when he say that he will no more answer questions because peoples disagree with what he was explaining (some says that the explications wasn’t clear enough and if we compare with your last explanation the last was way more comprehensive and clear).
What kind of childish blackmail is that ? :joy:

Also, my last post is not intended to criticize game designers and their work.
I greatly support your opinion when you say that they need time and playtest. I wasn’t asking for more rapid answers, but more comprehensive and complete explanations.

I think I’m not the only one who prefers a long and detailled clarification about a rule or a concept, rather than an expeditive : “Listen to me, I speak with the game designers, you don’t understand the spirit of the rules” ; “if you disagree with me, you are wrong”.
Come on we can take the time to have a real discussion and understand all the aspects.

Of course I’m not speaking of questions that can be answered quickly, but more complex and particular situations like we had discussed here.

@hbg-gw-enthusiast I think that you are correct I was just guessing with what captain napalm said there (last post) : https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/36668/railing-militia/5

And for an example it could be the english militia in northern ireland (this province is home country) moving to northern england.

Also, quite strange that there isn’t a narrow crossing between northern ireland and northern england.

@jan-aerts

B)

Answer could be find in japan reference sheet page 1.

“WARTIME BONUS INCOME - Once at war with a Major Power. (excluding an evolved CCP/KMT)”

Last time we were speaking with some friends and came to the same conclusions as you @HBG-GW-Enthusiast : maybe luck has a great (maybe too much) importance in the peacetime rolls.

We think about the same idea : still having a d6 roll and a fix number to complete the peacetime roll. You propose a d6 + 3 ipc, in our group we didn’t know what is the good number to complete the peacetime roll increase, because we maybe lack some experience.

To conclude, we support your point of view, less luck is more fun. By adding a fix number you just suppress the “extreme values” like 1-2-3 and 10-11-12, witch seems good.

We also get a similar discussion about tech rolls because they seems to rely too much on chance. For example, the wartime economy could have a lot of impact in the game.
The problem isn’t the too powerfull effects of the techs, but the proeminent presence of luck to get them.

Also, maybe the fact that this game is 3 sided team is meant to counter the presence of too much luck ? idk thats just a thinking.

Last time we were speaking with some friends and came to the same conclusions as you @HBG-GW-Enthusiast : maybe luck has a great (maybe too much) importance in the peacetime rolls.

We think about the same idea : still having a d6 roll and a fix number to complete the peacetime roll. You propose a d6 + 3 ipc, in our group we didn’t know what is the good number to complete the peacetime roll increase, because we maybe lack some experience.

To conclude, we support your point of view, less luck is more fun. By adding a fix number you just suppress the “extreme values” like 1-2-3 and 10-11-12, witch seems good.

We also get a similar discussion about tech rolls because they seems to rely too much on chance. For example, the wartime economy could have a lot of impact in the game.
The problem isn’t the too powerfull effects of the techs, but the proeminent presence of luck to get them.

Also, maybe the fact that this game is 3 sided team is meant to counter the presence of too much luck ? idk thats just a thinking.

Hey !

I was wondering if the Panzergrenadiers could be placed on captured factories outside of the german home country or if they can only be placed in the german country ?

Rules 7.8 on page 30 : “Units that become avaible after acquiring advanced technology have to be built in home country”.

So, are the panzergrenadiers considered has a advanced technology unit ? or just “special infantery” (like mountain or marines) ?

@hbg-gw-enthusiast Ok ! thanks for the answer !

So, I’m able to put facilities out of the map using the scorched earth tactic.

Also, if I use scorched earth tactic on a territory with railroads, these railroads are considered “remove from the map” even if I can’t put them out, because they are printed on the map?

@trig Ok I see!

Sorry for the double post, you already explain it in your first reply.

@trig Yep I see this thing about the possibility that submarines can passed by closed straits.

But if the expression warships is not only concerning surface warships like I pointed out with the examples in the rule book of the expression “surface warship”.
Maybe, the english sub can’t cross the straits while denmark is neutral.

So, in that situation the submarines can only cross gibraltar strait even if he is closed.

Hey!

I have a question about the danish straits. Is it possible to pass the danish straits with an english submarine, when the danemark is still neutral?

The rule for the danish straits are in the table 1-1 on page 10: “warships cannot move through the danish straits”.

The main problem is with the word “warships”, on the glossary, page 6: “warship: any surface ship that has an Attack value”.

But on the ANZAC reference sheet, in the wartime bonus income section “there are no enemy surface warships”.
Why is it need to specify a “surface warship” if the definition of a warship is already only the “surface ship that has an attack value”.
The same interrogation is present in the blockade rule 8.11 on page 37: “if you have three or more surface warships”.

This situation with the using of the expression “surface warships” is kind of disturbing and present on a few more place in the rule book. So, we also maybe need a clarification about the word “warship”?

Hey!

Sorry to ask that on this old topic, but I have questions about scorched earth.

-How many times can we use scorched earth ability per turn, I believe it’s only one territory per turn?

-Are the facilities remove from the board? Or just taking the maximum damage they can? When you use this ability on a territory.

-Can we move a factory (with the other USSR special ability) and then destroy the other facilities in that area?
The correct question should be: “when the factory movement ability is decide? Before or after the combat movement" (witch is the phase where you can use scorched earth).

Thanks again for your answers.
I have another question related to the terrain movement restrictions, specifically about the border.
I don’t know if it need to be another topic, since it’s a related stuff.

“terrain in the territory you start in doesn’t effect your movement, only territory you are travelling THROUGH or attempting to travel through”.

So, let’s take the initial situation:

I have 1 medium tank on the territory called “A”. I want to go to a territory called “C”. To do that I have to pass by another territory called “B”.

-First situation, there is a mountain border in the “B” territory, on the frontier with the “A” territory. Am I still able to reach the “C” territory with my medium tank?

-Second situation, there is a mountain border on the frontier between the “B” and “C” territory. Am I still able to reach the “C” territory with my medium tank?
In this situation it’s not necessary to precise on witch territory the mountain border is I think.

I think that this topic give the answer, but I’m not sure : https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/37413/terrain-movement-restrictions/13

Thank you both for your answers !
@Chris_Henry and @insaneHoshi

I should have read the errata first as always, my bad!

And for your question Chris, In the first situation “B” territory isn’t a mountain.

Hey!

I have a question about the terrains rules modifiers to movements. I’m not sure to clearly understand the wording of the rule or how to interpret it. I had the discussion with friends and we can’t figure out what the rule mean.

The mountain rule (1.8 on page 8): “All land units (except cavalry) have their movement reduced to 1 when subject to Mountain rules. Units cannot blitz across an Enemy Mountain border or into Mountain terrain”.

Let’s take an example: I have 1 medium tank on the territory called “A”. I want to go to a territory called “C”. To do that I have to pass by another territory called “B”.

-First situation, the “C” territory is a mountain, am I still able to reach the “C” territory with my medium tank?

-Second situation, the “B” territory is a mountain, am I still able to reach the “C” territory with my medium tank?

-Third situation, the “A” territory is a mountain, am I still able to reach the “C” territory with my medium tank?

Thanks for your answer!