Can air units fly over strict neutrals

@barnee

On a slightly unrelated note:

Do you think it would ever benefit Germany to grant the Baltic Fleet access to the Atlantic or the Northern Fleet to the Baltic? I’m not sure what’s the best move.

@Panther said in Can submarine go through a contested seazone?:

@AndrewAAGamer said in Can submarine go through a contested seazone?:

While Combat is considered simultaneous Combat Movement is not.

While you answered the scenario correctly, only the quoted sentence is not correct.
Page 12 Pacific 1940.2 rulebook says: “All combat movement is considered to take place at the same time.”
Here the submarines move from seazone A to C at the same time as the rest of the fleet moves from seazone A to B.

Than you Panther for pointing that out. Then perhaps I have been misusing a scenario. I will open a new thread not to hijack this one.

I think you should re read the rules. They’re clear.

Sorry Andrew.
Thank you Krieg for correcting me and well done Wheatbeer.

@knp7765:

@kcdzim:

And Allied units that enter original USSR territories should be “interned” - removed from the board with infantry (and infantry only) showing up back in their home capitals a couple rounds later in equal numbers to the units interned   :wink:

In the original Europe game, they had a rule if UK or US planes landed in a Soviet territory with an IC, on the Russian Mobilize Units phase, they could be turned into Russian planes.

I always wondered about something like this.  Considering the equipment lend lease that USA had with USSR I would of thought “gifting” units to Russia should be acheived in someway.  Of course who knows what that would do to balance.  I guess the the Archangel NO is their to represent the Lend-lease activities.

The only scenario where I would consider attacking neutrals is if I had a big army (either Axis or Allies) that needs to go through Turkey and isn’t mobile enough to go around Turkey.  I’ve never actually seen that scenario though.

In general the downside to attacking neutrals is way more significant than any perceived upside.  It’s hard to justify a move that is going to gift 15+ infantry to your opponent.

@Alsch91:

If you’re not going for Sealion, what good does SBRing London do?
What would UK build there?
Ships get placed in SZ 106, far away from German air + subs, and land forces that are sent against Italy are placed in either Saf or maybe an IC in the middle east.

UK might place planes in London, but that’s once in a while.
If I were UK and Germany was keen on bombing me but not on Sealion, I’d just let him do it and lose planes to AA.

It prevents UK from building up a fleet off of its own coast, forces them to repair damage if they want to use their naval base/airbase (especially key when it comes to scrambling), or IC’s. This, coupled with subs raiding convoys, will drag Britain down to nothing but what they can put up in Africa/the Mideast.

Thanks.  Kinda disappointing however…  :cry: