Why can't movement be a single phase?

The only facility that is buildable on your allies territory is the rail line because it’s the only facility that is built on a territory line instead of the territory itself.

Example: I know a rail line exist but for the sake of argument.

Lets say UK wanted to build a rail line between Jordan and Syria. You would build it on the Jordan-Syrian line however because Syria is French, you need France’s permission to do this.

@trig thanks !

@mike141500
Any nation can remain neutral if it is not attacked or does not attack first. And a declaration of war by another power is not a declaration of war by the power that is attacked. Even though it would attack the agressor, it is not considered to be aggression. If played badly, USSR could be in great troubles declaring war on all Axis powers by itself. But who knows, you might have a lucky day 🍀

@theveteran No problem.

Ok, now back to mountainous borders. I’m not saying terrain is magically flat if it is friendly. The way you can be certain that I don’t believe that is to scroll back and read where I said if the armor were in Northern Italy and moving through a friendly Southern France, it would not be allowed to continue on to Aquitaine the same turn.

I’m saying that when a land zone is friendly, then border terrain doesn’t start affecting you until the moment you cross the border. And the river rules give a hint that my perspective may be the correct one.

Sidenote on Game Design: There are two ways game designers can approach movement costs: walls or quicksand. With the walls approach, you are not permitted to move unless you have sufficient movement. If I understand Global War’s system, it is a quicksand one. You are allowed to go in, but then get penalized and stuck. This is the way I conceptualize it. I may be wrong, but I know Morten’s approach in general is to give the player choices with consequences. Other game designers forbid players from doing things.

@chris_henry I think I will just amend the set-up to make it a minor factory and leave it at that for now…

If the rules had a different mechanic for the annexation process other than a combat move then I might think that the medium factory could stay a medium factory. The rules state any factory that was a major or medium in a territory that is conquered becomes a minor factory.

I guess there is nothing to stop the Germans from building another minor factory there if they want but why would they?

I think it was just a mistake when the neutral set-up was getting developed.

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in Does the Global War 1936-1945 board game (third edition) actually exist? How can I buy one?:

@gen-manstein said in Does the Global War 1936-1945 board game (third edition) actually exist? How can I buy one?:

What were the Plan Z ships ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Z

Ya I read that. Thanks hbg-gw. Thought I missed something. Thought maybe co. Made a specific piece. Yes I do have as a National
Adjective in my game

A2C566A8-C3FE-49DE-8C4C-DC686358B561.jpeg

Thx, yes I seem to find the answer to most of my questions just by asking them…

@noneshallpass Thanks for the quick response!