MOVED: Historically accurate war declarations?

@barnee said in USA Controls Korea with a Soviet Infantry Present and Russia Not at War with JPN:

heh heh I only checked the Pacific rules :)

You were not wrong to check the Pacific rulebook, there it is on pages 14 and 36.

@dazedwit

Agreed.

No, you are not missing anything. That is a perfectly legal move. I am assuming that the Allies still control Gibraltar, right?

In fact, in your example, since Gibraltar has a friendly naval base (assuming it hasn’t been bombed), the US fleet could go all the way to Sea Zone 95 and park right next to Italy if Italy had no ships there OR they just had submarines and/or transports. Even if Italy had fighters on their air base, they couldn’t scramble because it is the US NON-combat move.

You can basically move your ships to any sea zone you want as long as there are no enemy surface warships blocking your way, or as in your example you have cleared any enemy warships.
Of course, that US submarine would have to remain in the sea zone just east of Gibraltar since it moved in the combat movement.

SZ 106 2SS
SZ 111 SS, 2 Bombers, BB, FTR, Tac (can divert 1 Bomber to 109 to help prevent scramble)
SZ 109 2SS, 2FTR, 2TAC
Normandy: Art/Inf/Tac
Yugo: S. Germany units and Romania FTR (so it can go to S. Italy)
NCM same
All available mechs/tanks, and remaining inf at France with Tac/FTR

Why risk S. France with 3 tanks? Save S. France for IT. 
Yugo is an overkill.  Why 9inf in needed for support (where are the other 3 coming from, and why isn’t 6 from S. Germany enough)?
I was taught that it’s better to eliminate the DDs to help choke off UK with your SS(hence why I left 110 open). Yes, I know the 110 ships run like hell…
70IPCs is plenty of cash for 10art,7mech.
While I know risking a plane to France’s AA is a risk, I like a quick battle so maybe I don’t have to dig into arts when I lose all my inf (trying to avoid a 2nd RD resistance)

I’m by no means an expert an global, it’s just something I used/learn.

@Chia909:

In the rules, it states (paraphrasing) that Japan attacking or landing on Dutch Islands provokes war with UK and ANZAC.  In a different section it also states that unprovoked war with UK and ANZAC by Japan results in war with America. Is this a proper use of the transitive property?  I don’t know if its just me or what but it sounds like America shouldn’t be going to war over the Dutch Islands.  What is the official clarification please?

1)  Japan must first declare war on UK/Anzac before they can perform a combat move on a Dutch Territory.
2) If Japan declares war on UK/ANZAC before UK or ANZAC declare war on Japan, it is unprovoked.  However, it only permits America to declare war on her turn.  It does not immediately bring the US into the war.

G1 and J1 games get wild :D

@Cmdr:

Accept, you’re down 4 defense units making the sacking of NSW easier.

The American fleet will help things out

What stops US or UK placing 4-5 fighters in Gibraltar. Each would roll a 2 vs a 1 the escorting fighters if any(lack range i think) might get. Each Bombing raid would cost the attacker 1-2 bombers from defending fighters before you roll AA.