Why can't movement be a single phase?

This is all on the NRS. The only condition that is not USSR dependent is that Germany or Japan has surrendered.

There is no single CCP action that can trigger an allied declaration of War.

@trig thanks !

@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.

@delaja While I am neither a game designer or profess to be one, your post does not tell me anything I don’t already know. This “suggested” house rule was only meant to spark some interest in adding minor and major airbases to the game like ports, docks, and shipyards and using planes in a somewhat realistic fashion. The house rule was intended for someone like yourself, a “veteran game designer”, to perhaps add in things that ‘could work’ not theoretical things that might work. So if you want to add value to this post, please rewrite or add suggestions for the house rule for players out there that would like to see minor and major airbases in the game. I appreciate the feedback and encouragement though.

@trig said in Can submarines move through enemey channals like the suez Channel in combat move:

@hbg-gw-enthusiast
My suggestion would be to have that sub moving through Suez wait to enter 83, and then raid in it. That would show you can seperate moves, and don’t have to do them sequentially.
Also, what was the point of the transport in 85? I didn’t see where that came up.

I was going to have the Japanese use their Surprise Attack ability to grant that submarine one more movement to go after the transport in 85. Maybe I’ll make the transport in 85 two naked CV’s instead.

You should probably also mention scrambling and maybe something with MAP, do cover all the bases. Maybe there is a plane on MAP in 82 or something to do with that in another spot? Just to show how this also applies during wartime moves after the DOW.
Overall, looks good! I would also probably mention some other possibilities, if say, GB does DOW and how that would work with screening forces.

Great ideas!

I really like the use of this system for all moves, and will definitely “house rule” it in.

I believe in the game designers and hope that with time, this system will be officially adopted! Other than the two GHG videos, this is how I would have thought the rules work as written.

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

@noneshallpass Thanks for the quick response!

I figured as much but thank u.