League General Discussion Thread

[axis-dominion]

Turns out it’s likely my ISP as I was able to make things work again when I switched from my wifi to my phone’s personal hotspot. Now I have to call them up and see why it’s blocking me (tho some rolls do go through)… I was having other intermittent issues in general like my zoom disconnecting on me etc)

[Stucifer]

@barnee said in League General Discussion Thread:

yea my guess is that it’s a email issue. Unfortunately, I don’t think you can change emails mid game. I have never tried it though.

You can indeed change the emails, same as when you start a new game. After you have loaded up the save the dice server options before you enter the game.

[mikawagunichi]

I have not had any problems with the rolls, but I had not gotten a single Marti email for any game since July 1st until I finally just got one yesterday. Also no matter how many times I tell Gmail the Marti emails are not spam, many still get labeled as such. Maybe time for me to give another email provider a shot a well.

[mikawagunichi]

@mikawagunichi Proton worked like a champ. Marti emails galore

[Stucifer]

Question for the rules lawyers here! :)
@Adam514 @gamerman01

The Pacific rulebook states:
The United States begins the game at war with no one. In addition to the normal restrictions (see “Powers Not at War with One Another,” page 15), while it’s not at war with Japan, the United States may not move any units into or through China or end the movement of its sea units in sea zones that are adjacent to Japan-controlled territories.

I’m not sure if I’m interpreting this correctly. Japan is not at war with USA, but captured Solomons as ANZAC declared war round 2. Since USA does not go to war until the end of its turn, I would assume this means USA will have to move their fleet out of 50&55. (PtV game)

Game Link: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/post/1714994

Thanks in advance for clarifying for me and @max334!

[gamerman01]

USA may declare war at the beginning of the combat movement phase of round 3 because Japan declared war on UK/ANZ

If USA decides not to declare war on Japan US3, then USA may decide to declare war at the beginning of the collect income phase of US3 (note that this is actually optional)

So in the event that the USA for some reason does not declare war at the beginning of US3 (I suspect you may have overlooked this because of your question) then the USA is neutral during USA3 noncombat movement phase. One could argue that “may not end the movement of its sea units in sea zones that are adjacent to Japan-controlled territories” could mean that the USA can not MOVE and then end movement in such a sea zone, but I suspect the majority would interpret that the USA would have to move away, as you said, out of the sea zone that is now too close to Japanese property (the Solomons)

I’m not meaning to make some official interpretation here, I’m first wondering if in your case the US would declare war on US3 because now they can, in which case the rule about bordering Japan territory is irrelevant.

[ArtofWar1947]

@gamerman01

But Japan did not declare war on UK/ANZ; ANZ declared war on Japan changing the political status of ANZ, UK, UKP, and the Dutch with Japan as unprovoked. The US was not affected by ANZ unprovoked declaration of war on Japan. Right?

[mikawagunichi]

My 2 cents - the OOB rules require reinterpretation for PTV anyway as there are multiple sea zones which border both originally controlled US and Japanese territories, which puts some of the OOB rules in conflict. I would say if they are allowed to be in a SZ at the beginning on their turn, they are allowed to be there at the end.

[Stucifer]

@gamerman01 thanks for the reply. The US fleet is currently adjacent to both Queensland and the Solomons. The Solomons is Japanese-held and Queensland is ANZAC-held. ANZAC did an unprovoked war Dec round 2 so USA cannot declare war until the collect income phase. Since the fleet is already there, it’s not moving, but it would be ending the Movement phase there. 🤔

@mikawagunichi makes a good point that since there are some shared sea zones in PTV, where USA has a territory and so does Japan, that you would be legal to end your turn as the USA there.

[Stucifer]

@ArtofWar1947 correct, ANZAC did an unprovoked attack so US cannot wardec until Collect Income of the round (we’re currently in round 3).

I can see a good argument for US fleet to be able to stay off the coast of Queensland, but seems that it would definitely be required to vacate the SZ that only touches Solomons.

[Adam514]

@Stucifer said in League General Discussion Thread:

@ArtofWar1947 correct, ANZAC did an unprovoked attack so US cannot wardec until Collect Income of the round (we’re currently in round 3).

I can see a good argument for US fleet to be able to stay off the coast of Queensland, but seems that it would definitely be required to vacate the SZ that only touches Solomons.

This situation has been thought about during the development of PTV. The PTV rule is the same as the G40 rule, so the US fleet must vacate any sea zone that touches a Japanese-controlled territory (in the event of an unprovoked declaration by Anzac/UK for example. It’s what makes the most sense, and the Allied player should take this into account when deciding if they want to make an unprovoked declaration of war on Japan.

[Amon-Sul]

Can Japan declare war to USA, but not to ANZAC and UK ?

Or it is possible only in the opposite direction?

[FlyingBadger]

@Amon-Sul said in League General Discussion Thread:

Can Japan declare war to USA, but not to ANZAC and UK ?

Or it is possible only in the opposite direction?

Japan can make an unprovoked declaration of war against the UK & ANZAC without also declaring war on the US. However, this then allows the US to declare war on Japan.

Bascially, you are going to be at war with them anyway so I guess why not just do it all in one go and save on the paperwaork.

[gamerman01]

@Amon-Sul said in League General Discussion Thread:

Can Japan declare war to USA, but not to ANZAC and UK ?

Or it is possible only in the opposite direction?

Yes, it is possible for Japan to declare war on the USA and not on UK/ANZ, so beware, Japan could zip through neutral UK/ANZ ships to get to the USA fleet
It is just when Japan declares war on UK/ANZ that USA may declare war on Japan. There is no rule that if Japan declares on USA that she must also declare on UK/ANZ

Sorry I didn’t look at a PTV map when answering, and forgot how those Pacific sea zones work. But the answer is the same, US can’t end movement by Japan territory if not at war.
I was also confused, thinking Japan was at war with USA but it was unprovoked attack by UK/ANZ, thank you for clearing that up @ArtofWar1947

Adam cleared it up - they interpret the rules that USA can’t stay in a zone bordering Japan territory, so have to vacate when not at war with Japan, that makes sense.

[Stucifer]

@Adam514 said in League General Discussion Thread:

[…] The PTV rule is the same as the G40 rule, so the US fleet must vacate any sea zone that touches a Japanese-controlled territory (in the event of an unprovoked declaration by Anzac/UK for example.

Thank you. Is there an exception for SZs 21,22,32,36? These sea zones are adjacent to both American & Japanese territories. I doubt any of those would be of interest to a US player, except perhaps 32: Wake Island, Marshall Islands.

[Adam514]

@Stucifer said in League General Discussion Thread:

@Adam514 said in League General Discussion Thread:

[…] The PTV rule is the same as the G40 rule, so the US fleet must vacate any sea zone that touches a Japanese-controlled territory (in the event of an unprovoked declaration by Anzac/UK for example.

Thank you. Is there an exception for SZs 21,22,32,36? These sea zones are adjacent to both American & Japanese territories. I doubt any of those would be of interest to a US player, except perhaps 32: Wake Island, Marshall Islands.

No exceptions. Also means US ships need to leave Philippines on US1.

[pacifiersboard]

@mikawagunichi
@Stucifer @max334 @gamerman01 @Adam514

I had a rough read here and remembered that
@Krieghund said in Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2):

@pacifiersboard

No, it applies to all Japanese-controlled territories. However, New Zealand was not Japanese-controlled when the destroyer ended its movement there. It can remain there indefinitely, but if it moves away it may not return.

So to sum it up in my words it is about ending a movement not about ending a movement phase.

[gamerman01]

@gamerman01 said in League General Discussion Thread:

One could argue that “may not end the movement of its sea units in sea zones that are adjacent to Japan-controlled territories” could mean that the USA can not MOVE and then end movement in such a sea zone, but I suspect the majority would interpret that the USA would have to move away, as you said, out of the sea zone that is now too close to Japanese property (the Solomons)

😑And I guess the majority of us would be wrong
Thanks @pacifiersboard !

[max334]

@Adam514 ty, good to know

[surfer]

@max334 Um. I think @Adam514 got it wrong. According to quote “New Zealand was not Japanese-controlled when the destroyer ended its movement there. It can remain there indefinitely, but if it moves away it may not return.”

Thus, the US navy in the Philippines in a PTV does NOT have to leave SZ36 on US1. Now, usually they would want to move and would not be able to come back until the war started, but the G40 rule which applies to PTV states they can remain in a SZ even if surrounding territory becomes Japanese.

To be honest, before I read this I was of the “majority” opinion that the US would need to move.