I know Krieghund has answered this before but I must not have made a note in my rulebook. I will try a search of this thread now, and there’s a good chance I can find it - hang on
Eh - not finding it, I guess we need him to answer it again
From the 2nd Edition Europe Rulebook, page 11:
Strict neutrals are treated in exactly the same way as unfriendly neutrals, with one exception. An attack by either alliance on a strict neutral territory (whether successful or not) will result in all remaining strict neutrals immediately becoming pro-Allies or pro-Axis, depending on who violated the strict neutral’s neutrality.
So, yes, they are treated in the same way for this purpose.
Thank you both, Krieghund and Gamerman. It seems the rules can still mystify me in cases that don’t happen very often. :-)
I’m the US and I want to attack Spain with a large landing force. May I load one transport with an infantry and an AA gun, send that transport during the combat movement phase where the infantry exits on shore during the amphibious assault, and in the non combat movement phase… can I unload the AA gun from the same transport that landed an infantry earlier?
@Young:
I’m the US and I want to attack Spain with a large landing force. May I load one transport with an infantry and an AA gun, send that transport during the combat movement phase where the infantry exits on shore during the amphibious assault, and in the non combat movement phase… can I unload the AA gun from the same transport that landed an infantry earlier?
I have no citation from the rule book, but one from earlier in this thread.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28562.msg1027632#msg1027632
Maybe this helps, maybe not :-D
@Young:
I’m the US and I want to attack Spain with a large landing force. May I load one transport with an infantry and an AA gun, send that transport during the combat movement phase where the infantry exits on shore during the amphibious assault, and in the non combat movement phase… can I unload the AA gun from the same transport that landed an infantry earlier?
I don’t believe so, because that would required loading the AA gun onto the transport during combat movement, and I thought AA guns are not allowed to move during combat movement unless already loaded onto a transport.
Marsh
Marshmallow’s right about not being able to load AA during the combat move, but even if it had been previously loaded on an earlier turn you can’t unload an infantry during amphibious assault and the AAA later on the noncombat movement.
Once a transport moves or unloads, it is DONE for the turn
Thanks for the clarification.
I want to upgrade a minor IC to a Major IC in Kiangsu. Can I build units in the IC and then upgrade same turn? Can upgrade and then place more than 3 units in the same turn?
I want to upgrade a minor IC to a Major IC in Kiangsu. Can I build units in the IC and then upgrade same turn? Can upgrade and then place more than 3 units in the same turn?
This is against the rules. As Kiangsu is originally controlled by China:
@rulebook:
A minor industrial complex can be upgraded to a major one at
a cost of 20 IPCs. The industrial complex to be upgraded must be located on an originally controlled (not captured) territory
that you have controlled since the beginning of your turn and that has an IPC value of 3 or higher.
Upgrading factories takes place in the “Mobilize New Units”-Phase, see:
@rulebook:
The number of combat (land, air, or sea) units that can be
produced by each industrial complex each turn is limited
to 10 for major industrial complexes and 3 for minor ones.
(If you are upgrading a minor industrial complex to a major
one, you may still only mobilize up to 3 combat units from
that industrial complex this turn.)
HTH :-)
Thanks for your answers.
I thought since it was Japan controlled since the start of the game that it didn’t apply, but I see your point.
Then I need to come up with a different plan… ;)
Yes, we all also had to get the same clarification in the past (from Krieghund, which is official)
What was meant by originally controlled, was what is printed on the map board.
So the only major complex Japan can legally build, is on Korea
I thought since it was Japan controlled since the start of the game that it didn’t apply, but I see your point.
Tricky, indeed… Kiangsu is a Chinese territory that Japan has captured before the game begins.
It is the (Chinese) emblem printed on the map that is relevant here.
Enjoy your game :-)
Hah! Glad to know I’m not the only one making this faulty assumption. :)
Thanks! I think I’ll still beat him… Just have to get creative on the other side of the rules! :-D
For this clarification, see page 8 of either the Europe or Pacific Rulebook:
When the rules refer to the “original controller†of a territory, they mean the power whose emblem is printed on the territory. All other spaces are neutral and are not aligned with any power.
My friend is attempting t take the Money Islands with the US.
I thought only UK and ANZAC may do that?
You are right.
America can only take them from Japan. If they are still Dutch and the US land there, they remain Dutch. It sounds like you have understood correctly.
@wittmann:
You are right.
America can only take them from Japan. If they are still Dutch and the US land there, they remain Dutch. It sounds like you have understood correctly.
Thank you.
So after they’ve been invaded by Japan, any ally can claim them as their own? Or will they merely be liberated if the US take them?
So after they’ve been invaded by Japan, any ally can claim them as their own?
Yes
Or will they merely be liberated if the US take them?
No.
The Dutch territories are like the French territories (after Paris falls), except that UK/ANZ has the “special ability” to take control of the (Dutch) friendly territories with a non-com of a ground unit into them.
So if the Axis take control of a Dutch territory, then basically you can forget that it was ever Dutch. Yes, any ally can then take control of the Dutch territory when taking it back from the Axis
Any Ally can take them Bass. Hope you are enjoying the game.
