@Charles:
This is kind of weird, and I think I’m just missing the obvious, but is this allowed?
Germany declares war on Russia turn two and takes Ukraine turn three.
Japan stays neutral to the West but attacks Russia and takes Yunnan. On turn two a Japanese bomber parks in Yunnan. On turn three Japan bombs Stalingrad and lands in German-controlled Ukraine.
Later on turn three, the UK wants to attack the poorly defended bomber in Ukraine with air units.First of all, can Japan land in German-controlled territories (or Italian for that matter) as long as Japan is at war with the Soviets (and so is the European axis power)?
Yes. Russia is neutral on neither map, and Japan and Germany are allies as they are both at war with Russia.
Second, does the UK have to declare war on Japan in order to attack a Japanese bomber in Ukraine? Not that it really matters anyway.
Yes. You can never attack a territory that has units of a power with which you are not at war.
Q: Attacker has an AB on Gib and launches an attack on Yugoslavia and lands in Tobruk.
Is this legal since he has to fly over Neutral Spain?
Even if he decides to DOW Neutrals this turn and attacks it?
So can he fly over in the same turn were he is attacking Neutral Spain?
Mongolia:
If Japan attacks a Russian controlled territory bordering Mongolia, all of Mongolia is immediately Russian
a) If Japan attacks Mongolia in the same combat move (as attacking a Russian controlled territory bordering Mongolia), they break neutrality of all strict neutrals
b) This is the ONLY way all of Mongolia will immediately turn Russian without territories needing to be activated.If Russia attacks Korea or a Japanese controlled territory bordering Mongolia, then the Mongolians will never join Russia as in #1 above
If neither of the above takes place, Mongolia continues on as a strict neutral, but
- Will NOT go pro-Axis if the Allies break neutrality elsewhere
a) Mongolia ONLY goes pro-Axis if Russia directly attacks Mongolia. This would break neutrality around the world (all strict neutrals go pro-the other side).
i) Any OTHER Ally can attack Mongolia directly and this will break neutrality around the world, but the rest of Mongolia will stay neutral
b) Mongolia WILL go pro-Allied if the Axis break strict neutrality anywhere, including Mongolia
Neutrals:
- You can’t move a tank through a friendly neutral that you just activated
a) You CAN blitz strict neutrals and unfriendly neutrals
b) You also can’t non-com mech or tanks through the friendly neutral that you just took control of.- You CAN’T land air in any neutral that was neutral at the beginning of your turn
a) You CAN land air in a neutral that has been attacked previously and joined your side (the infantry are still not controlled by a playable power because the territory has not been activated and is not controlled by any playable power yet)- You CAN’T fly over neutrals
a) Except to attack it directly
b) After attacking it, you CAN fly off where-ever you want as long as you don’t fly over another neutral
c) You CAN fly over a neutral that has been attacked previously, because it is actually no longer a neutral even if it was not conquered. It has joined the opposing side. You can do this in the non-combat move immediately following the attack.- You activate a friendly neutral with an infantry, artillery, mech, or tank. You cannot activate a friendly neutral with only an AAA gun.
- Despite what Triple A says, you do NOT declare war on neutrals. You simply “attack” them (individually).
Beware: There are currently a lot of these rules that Triple A does not currently adhere to correctly. You are responsible for knowing the rules yourself. Don’t rely on Triple A for rule interpretation. Just because it allows it, doesn’t mean it’s legal.
Thank you guys for your quick Response as usually!
AetV
@aequitas:
Q: Attacker has an AB on Gib and launches an attack on Yugoslavia and lands in Tobruk.
Is this legal since he has to fly over Neutral Spain?
Even if he decides to DOW Neutrals this turn and attacks it?
- You CAN’T fly over neutrals
a) Except to attack it directlySo can he fly over in the same turn were he is attacking Neutral Spain?
No. This is illegal during the same combat move phase. “All combat movement is considered to take place at the same time.”
You don’t DOW neutrals - that is only Triple A wording. There’s no such thing in the rulebook.
You attack neutrals individually. So if he’s attacking Yugoslavia he can’t fly over neutral Spain.
Now I notice your question “even if I attack Spain at the same time” - so take P@nther’s answer together with mine.
I will add - since the air flying over Spain to get to Yugoslavia is not attacking Spain, it is not able to fly over Spain.
@aequitas:
The Allied Player attacked Portugal and Spain on his turn as the US and flew planes over Spain to Yugoslavia.
Doing so implies a sort of order in combat movements, such as:
First combat movement: Attack Spain so Spain is no longer neutral.
afterwards:
Second combat movement: Fly over Spain to attack Yugoslavia.
As written above “All combat movement is considered to take place at the same time.” (Rulebook Europe, page 13).
So the implied order is not possible.
At the start of the combat movement phase and before all combat moves Spain is neutral. Now all combat moves occur simultaneously.
And Spain losing its neutrality is a consequence of a combat move.
Thank you Panther for clarifying it.
if a defender scrams a ftr into a sz in which defender has a sub making the sea zone hostile to amphibious attack, can the attacker ignore the sub in round 2 of combat round if the attacker kills the fighter in round one?
Point being, without the defending fighter, the sub could be ignored. If the fighter is killed, can the sub then be ignored, or once encountered it must be fought until it is destroyed or submerges?
if a defender scrams a ftr into a sz in which defender has a sub making the sea zone hostile to amphibious attack, can the attacker ignore the sub in round 2 of combat round if the attacker kills the fighter in round one?
Point being, without the defending fighter, the sub could be ignored. If the fighter is killed, can the sub then be ignored, or once encountered it must be fought until it is destroyed or submerges?
it must be fought :-P
@P@nther:
@aequitas:
The Allied Player attacked Portugal and Spain on his turn as the US and flew planes over Spain to Yugoslavia.
Doing so implies a sort of order in combat movements, such as:
First combat movement: Attack Spain so Spain is no longer neutral.
afterwards:
Second combat movement: Fly over Spain to attack Yugoslavia.As written above “All combat movement is considered to take place at the same time.” (Rulebook Europe, page 13).
So the implied order is not possible.**At the start of the combat movement phase and before all combat moves Spain is neutral. Now all combat moves occur simultaneously.
And Spain losing its neutrality is a consequence of a combat move.**
that is it, in short terms
if a defender scrams a ftr into a sz in which defender has a sub making the sea zone hostile to amphibious attack, can the attacker ignore the sub in round 2 of combat round if the attacker kills the fighter in round one?
No, ignoring subs is only a combat movement issue. Once combat begins, there is no ignoring subs/transports.
Point being, without the defending fighter, the sub could be ignored. If the fighter is killed, can the sub then be ignored, or once encountered it must be fought until it is destroyed or submerges?
The latter, and see again my answer above
So if an Italian tank is in Italian controlled Egypt, Trans-Jordan is British controlled and has no units in it, and Iraq has not been activated, on Italy’s turn may their tank from Egypt to Trans-Jordan and into Iraq to activate it?
So if an Italian tank is in Italian controlled Egypt, Trans-Jordan is British controlled and has no units in it, and Iraq has not been activated, on Italy’s turn may their tank from Egypt to Trans-Jordan and into Iraq to activate it?
No. Moving into Trans-Jordan has to happen during combat movement phase, and moving into Iraq would happen on non-combat movement phase. The tank can’t move in both phases.
So if an Italian tank is in Italian controlled Egypt, Trans-Jordan is British controlled and has no units in it, and Iraq has not been activated, on Italy’s turn may their tank from Egypt to Trans-Jordan and into Iraq to activate it?
No. Moving into Trans-Jordan has to happen during combat movement phase, and moving into Iraq would happen on non-combat movement phase. The tank can’t move in both phases.
So you could capture Trans Jordan with another Italian unit during combat move and then move the tank to Iraq in non combat. That way the tank is still where you want it to be at the end of turn, you control both territories, and Iraq infantry will be activated.
Is the Chinese Flying Tiger Fighter allowed to fly to a sea zone within range to attack Japanese ships? For instance, could the fighter based in Yunnan fly to SZ 36 to sink a lone Japanese transport? China rules on page 10 seem to indicate that it cannot.
No. Flying Tigers can not leave Chinese lands, except Hong Kong and Burma.
I detest that rule with a passion. :x
I call for revolution.
In a sea battle where the defender has transport(s) among other combat units, if after a given combat round the attacker were to score exactly enough hits to clear the defending combat units and still have surviving attacking units, is the attacker obligated to remain in the sea zone and also kill the transport(s)? Or does the attacker have the option to retreat and leave the transport(s) alive?
Morning Tizkit.
Yes. It must, if all hits have been allocated to ships.
No, he does not have that option. The attacker cannot retreat , if all defending units have been eliminated.
@wittmann:
The attacker cannot retreat , if all defending units have been eliminated.
He meant all defending units with a combat value. (all non-transports)
Similarly, you cannot retreat from AA guns only - they are destroyed and the attacker must take over the territory with everything that’s there.
May Japan attack Persia (pro allies neutral) whithout declaring war on England?
