Posts made by HBG GW Enthusiast

@didier_de_dax What kind words, my friend! I want you to know that GHG has answered hundreds and hundreds of questions. He is actually a very friendly and helpful person, Didier! 8 ) He has poured probably thousands of hours into Global War and has done so much to advance the game. I am very grateful for all GHG has and continues to do for this game that we both love.

Sometimes we can answer questions definitively. We just quote a rule and there really isn’t any dispute. These are the most straight forward and I have found Trig and Noneshallpass to be tremendous assets here. They really have a deep knowledge of the game.

Sometimes, the rules aren’t as clear as we would like them to be. People are confused by the wording or there are two different sections of the rules that are in conflict. Then we need help from the game designer to provide clarity. I’ve been very impressed with how rapidly the FAQ and rules errata have been updated. Respect! It’s fantastic to have quick response times for these kinds of issues.

And sometimes, the game evolves. A player starts using a new tactic (like the USSR invading South America to get America into the war early), and the game designer needs to respond to take corrective action. I’ve been a rules editor for even more complicated WW2 games than HBG’s Global War '36, and in my experience, it can be disastrous to be overreactive and make changes to the way the game is played without playtesting and a period of contemplation. If you respond with “evolutionary” rules changes too quickly, and then have to modify that change, it gives the playing community whiplash as the rules change this way and that. Morten is very good about taking his time and playtesting with his group before making these kinds of evolutionary changes. I think we should be patient and understanding in these kinds of changes. We want fast responses for the easy stuff and slow, thoughtful responses to complicated/evolutionary issues.

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

Ok this is starting to make sense to me now.

I have one last stickler, though. If the British fleet is in SZ 82, and you have to declare your intent when before entering a zone, doesn’t that mean, the italians cant attack the fleet in SZ82. The moment they are entering 82 from 81, they declare their intent and the Suez closes?

Well, if you look at the wording on page 37, Clarifying Ordering Effects, the key phrase is “…when moving into a new zone…” I define this as the fleet has just moved into a new zone, not, as you put it, “…before entering a zone…” So you enter into sea zone 81 and you announce, “I intend to move into sea zone 82, do you want to declare war on me and close the Suez canal?” The Commonwealth is in a precarious position. Should they declare war and prevent you from moving in, but suffering the penalties of declaring war? [Side Note: It’s hard for Great Britain to declare war on Italy if Italy is still neutral. Their National Reference Sheet specifies they can only declare war on Germany, Italy or Japan if those nations have already declared war on another nation.] If Great Britain does not or cannot declare war, then the Italians pass through the canal and are now entering sea zone 82. Upon entering sea zone 82, they now have to announce their intentions. If they announce they intend to attack the British fleet in sea zone 82, then that is a declaration of war by the Italians (but they already passed through the canal).

This is great! I would request that you edit your original post in this thread to include:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JLn9R80FzRh9_HTV1B7EmY5uvJRlNcrJ/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VKY6DGQLdDEx9agIAfLwo5fG39Q2esB5/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QQt6Lgo4QoFOKUa8d7CTRHHKLVZAvEL1/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z0B5qAf0EhK_D2I49LP2Q184ThtxNP9Z/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YLnHTE2H4OjVDnFJ6iBdh8Gnh1WTciKJ/view

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

Hey @Trig,

At first, thank you for your detailed answer and for taking the time to do it.

I agree with Trig’s long, detailed post, 4 above this one.

I understand that orders maters and that all units attacking in different combats don’t move at the same time.

Agreed.

If I understand it well, for example: a japan fleet attacks an FEC navy (near Australia) by passing thought an ANZAC navy, it create a state of war between the two opponents when the Japanese fleet is in the same sea zone as the FEC (because Japan did not tell is intention before). And after that, the Japanese player also announces that he will conduct a land battle against FEC in Burma. The combats are then resolves in the order of the attacking player (Japan here).
But if the Japanese player announces the land combat in Burma (creating a state of war between the two opponents) before announcing the naval battle with the FEC. Then, the naval battle with FEC is stopped by the ANZAC navy and the naval battle between Japan and ANZAC takes places instead of the one with FEC.

This is true. You have it correct.

Or maybe the screening force rules could be use there? One part of the Japan fleet fight with the ANZAC and the other part fight with the FEC? Even if there isn’t naval invasion occurring.
(I think that the screening forces rules didn’t happen there, but I prefer to make sure, so I ask).

In the 2nd situation where Japan declared war with the movement into Burma, the Japanese fleet can choose to engage the ANZAC fleet with a screening force and hold the other naval units out to proceed on to engage the FEC fleet if the screening force succeeds against the ANZAC fleet.

Then, you say that the player should announce what is he doing with his fleet, each time that he enter a new sea zone right? (not at the beginning of the move).

Correct.

So, during the combat move phase, the attacking player move his fleet on the same sea zone as his opponent, he announce that he will conduct a blockade (for example) on an enemy naval base in another sea zone (the naval base should be controlled by a nation which the attacking player is already at war before the start of the movement or he could also be a naval base controlled by the player who will defend against the attacking fleet?).

You don’t have to be at war before the start of the movement. You could be at peace and pass through other fleets or a canal, then enter the sea zone where you will blockade. At the moment you enter that last sea zone where you will blockade, the attacker has to announce intent first and that blockade announcement will be a declaration of war.

But this only works if there is a trade route to raid, to escort, or a naval base to blockade in a sea zone within the range of the navy, right? Or not necessarily?

Well, the examples you give do work, but I disagree with your use of “only”. There are other things you could also do. For example, you could attack another naval fleet or do other hostile things like an amphibious invasion. It even works if the defending player has a plane on MAP in that sea zone and the defender could declare war on you!

I think I understand your confusion. You feel like you need permission from the “rules” to be allowed to move a unit during combat movement. That isn’t how I think about it. I think about it as the defending player is giving the attacking player permission to move during combat movement. When you are not a war with a particular potential defending force, you need to move during combat movement if the defending player might declare war on you to prevent your further movement or you might declare war at the end of your movement.

I totally agree that in version 4 of the rules, we should strive for clarity on whether my understanding of the way it should work is correct. In my conceptualization, even if you were just moving through the Suez canal when you are not at war with the Commonwealth, it would happen during the combat movement phase because you would enter sea zone 81 and announce, “I intend to move through the Suez canal into sea zone 82. Do you declare war and stop me?” But this is just how I conceptualize it.

Let’s take a concrete example to understand my question better: (I will try to upload an image of this situation to make it more clear).
The Japanese player wants to attack a US destroyer in sea zone 42 with its destroyer that are in sea zone 56 (bay of Tokyo, so they benefits from the +1 naval movement of the major port in the sea zone). US and Japan are not already at war.
So, during the combat phase, he intended to pass by the sea zone 39, 40 that contains two US destroyers and 41, before finally entering in sea zone 42 at fight the US destroyer that is alone and so declares war.

In order to pass the two destroyers that are in sea zone 40 without fighting, he has to pretend that he will raid, escort on a naval route or blockade a naval base. The problem is that there isn’t such trade routes or naval facilities within the range of the two Japanese destroyers when they enter sea zone 40. So are the Japanese destroyers still able to continue their movement? Even if they can’t pretend to raid, escort in a sea route or blockade a naval base to within the range of these boats.

No, you don’t have to pretend to raid, escort or perform a naval blockade. You make your announcement sea zone by sea zone, as you enter each new sea zone. You enter sea zone 39, but there are no enemy units present and you want to keep moving. Since there are no enemy units present, you don’t need to announce anything because there is nothing the defending player can do to stop you. You then move into sea zone 40 where there are enemy units present. Now, there IS something the defending player can do to interfere with your movement, so your intention becomes important. The attacking player says, “I intend to move to sea zone 41. Do you want to declare war, defending player?” If no DoW by the defending player, then you move into sea zone 41. Again, there are no enemy units in sea zone 41 and there is nothing that can be done to stop you from entering sea zone 42, so it’s not necessary to announce your intention. You enter sea zone 42. Because you are the attacking player, you announce your intention first upon entering sea zone 42, saying, “I declare war on you and attack this destroyer.”

“6.2 also states that a player may resolve the actions during a phase in any order ».

This rule is useful when there is a city that could be encircled before attacking it. The attacking player choose to resolve the combat that allows a city to be encircled first, then the attacking player resolves the combat against the city that is now encircled (because there isn’t airbase or naval base undamaged there), so the malus of encirclement applies to the defender in the city, right?

Correct and an important tactic!

Just got back from a week long vacation and am very interested in this thread. Will respond in the morning after some sleep!

@gamer First, click here: https://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Global-War-1936-1945v3-Map-4x8_p_8028.html

I have selected the 4’x8’ map for you. The 3’x6’ map is too small and the 5’x10’ map is too big.

Click “Add to Cart.” Then, in the upper right, click “Checkout.”

Note: You will only have just begun. This is just the map and some ancillary charts. You still have to purchase A&A 1940 Europe and A&A 1940 Pacific (2nd editions) for about $70 each. You may also want to add Amerika, for $50: https://www.historicalboardgaming.com/HBG-Amerika-Boxed-Game_p_1353.html

Now you might have 50% of the pieces you will need. You can check this out for more suggestions: https://www.historicalboardgaming.com/assets/images/HBG/GW1936v3/Accessories/Needed Units for Global War 36V31.pdf

@insanehoshi said in Lightning War Question:

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in Lightning War Question:

Question 2: If you are using optional rule 10.2, then yes.

Doesnt there need to be an airbase there?

Hoshi, you are so meticulous and clever! You are absolutely correct. There is no airbase in the Netherlands, so my answer is WRONG. Great catch, my friend. 8 )

@noneshallpass said in The FAQ Thread:

we should really start new topics for new questions as this thread is getting hard to follow

I have cleaned up the original post up to this point and hopefully that will help, Noneshallpass! 8 )

@trig said in The FAQ Thread:

“A neutral Republican Spain will align with the USSR if attacked.”
Does this include a DOW? Or just an attack?

Yes, this seems like potential errata to me. It should be DOW in my opinion.

@trig I request a terrain player aid with pictures of the terrain!

Question 1: No, because of Page 46, 10.4. You have to have possessed The Netherlands at the start of the turn.

Question 2: If you are using optional rule 10.2, then yes. If not, then 10.3 applies and you may not.

Sorry! It’s not like you get to take two full, separate turns with “Lightning War.” It’s more like you get a turn “plus.”

@captainnapalm You are absolutely right!

@captainnapalm Oh, sorry Napalm! I was deducting. “For a minor power the home country includes the primary nation but not its colonies, islands or conquered land zones.” So we know the primary nation is not colonies, islands, or conquered land zones. The perfect example is Greece. The Greek home countries are Macedonia, Thessaly, and Peloponnese. Crete is not home country.

@captainnapalm said in The FAQ Thread:

@trig said in The FAQ Thread:

@insanehoshi Noneshallpass already got most of it, but I want to mention the the “primary nation” is all land zones connected by land to the nation’s capital. (the brighter roundel)

That makes common sense, but where do you find that, in the rules?

Page 6, Home Country, 2nd sentence.

@noneshallpass Your write-up is the definitive reference for Axis players deciding how to approach a Declaration of War on the Dutch!

@trig said in USA peacetime increase:

@hbg-gw-enthusiast Excellent answer.

Also, if Japan attacked the Dutch, it is likely that there are 3 territories left for the recruitment roll. See this sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CCjrtM8TWCyXmzDOslPz2MsG_OTv-UQNe6mL65glRww/edit#gid=0

I’m glad you nudged me about this! I had forgotten, so appreciate the reminder about Suriname and Lesser Antilles!

@noneshallpass said in The FAQ Thread:

@generalhandgrenade in you Declarations of War video, when you move your British fleet next to Tokyo you say
« I didn’t tell you that was a combat move. I don’t have to declare War on you yet. ».

Obviously if you are doing it during your Combat Phase, you will have to attack something in that zone by the end of the turn, so Japan knows that if he wants to block you he must declare war when the fleet enters zone 65 first.

There has to be some leeway for the players to figure out the timing of the declaration of War, especially if you skip over the zone that you have to go through to get to Tokyo when you move your fleet.

Well, I can see situations where you move during the combat movement phase, even when you do not plan to declare war that turn. I agree we need clarification here, but on Page 34, 8.2 During Combat Movement, there are two examples which seem to argue that you could move during the combat movement phase, without necessarily declaring war. “Example: Germany wants to move two heavy cruisers into a sea zone with a medium bomber on MAP. it must do so during the Combat Move Phase even though the aircraft could decline combat if it wishes.” At the end of section 8.2, it reads, “Note that combat may not always occur as sometimes one or both players will be given the choice to engage in combat or not.” I like my interpretation better than GHG’s where the attacking player doesn’t “skip over the zone you have to go through to get to Tokyo” and instead announces his intention to move through that zone to get to the sea zone adjacent to Tokyo.

Several threads above, I wrote something like: The Attacking (moving) player’s intent needs to be declared upon entering a sea zone, sea zone by sea zone. The announcement is something like, “My fleet enters this sea zone and intends to keep moving to this next sea zone. Do you want to declare war before I leave?” The Attacking player’s fleet reaches the final sea zone they want and they announce, “We now declare war because we are going to try to perform an amphibious assault with these ships/units.” If there are enemy naval units, the Attacking player adds, “These units are my screening force.”

It seems GHG disagrees with that approach, but I think it is elegant, fair, and clear. The core principle with my approach is the the attacking player announces their intended actions in a sea zone when they enter a sea zone. Most of the time, it won’t matter, but when it does matter, it’s clear as can be. With GHG’s proposed system, you have fleets skip over sea zones; Attacking players moving so that the Defending player declares war, but then the Attacking player undoes their movements and attacks somewhere else; and a new rule where sometimes the Attacking player has to announce their intention when they enter a sea zone, but other times they do not. But little, by little, we polish the surface of the mirror to perfection, my friends! Clarification by clarification! 8 )

@generalhandgrenade said in The FAQ Thread:

Declarations of War
https://youtu.be/Kz5Kl9oOZSA

Two follow ups:

1. Does the Clarifying Ordering Effects on Page 37, (a), also apply to amphibious assaults, or is there some exception about amphibious assaults? I assumed it did apply to amphibious assaults.
2. If a nation announces they will be engaging in an amphibious assault (or any other attack), is that not a declaration of war, in and of itself?

When you enter a sea zone where you will be doing combat (screening force, amphibious assault, etc.), your declaration of war occurs when you move into that sea zone. The Attacking player has to announce his intentions first and he has to do it upon entering the sea zone.

@generalhandgrenade Wow! I didn’t catch that Munck was the designer! Thanks. Doesn’t get more definitive than that!

@manincellv If the Dutch Align with the British upon a German DoW and subsequent capitulation, then it must mean that Germany is at war with the British. If the Germans were not at war with the British, then the Dutch wouldn’t Align. They would be controlled. I just want to make sure we are on the the same page as far as that goes.

As long as we are talking about the Dutch having Aligned with the British and The Netherlands has fallen, then any surviving Dutch units (naval, air, land, whatever) are replaced by British units. The Dutch cease to exist as a separate nation for purposes of the game. The British collect the income from the DEI and Suriname (10 IPP). The Dutch do NOT make a recruitment roll because that is for controlled minors, not Aligned minors (Page 21, Table 4-2, If a Major Power controls a minor power).

Rule 4.12 is about minors which are controlled. Let’s explore that. Let’s say the Germans are neutral to everyone and then declare war on the Dutch. As I wrote two posts above, “Now, The Netherlands East Indies becomes controlled by Great Britain as long as Germany isn’t at war with another Major Power. This increases Great Britain’s peacetime income by 2D12, which is an average of 13. Their starting income is 11 and their wartime income is 25. Perhaps you get to 24. Risky, but possible.” So it’s possible that the British control the DEI. The moment Great Britain is a war with the Germans, the DEI will change from controlled to Aligned, but until that time, the Dutch units remain Dutch. They are controlled by the British, but still Dutch. The British do NOT collect income form the DEI. You can make recruitment rolls at “9” once a turn while the DEI, Lesser Antilles, and Suriname are controlled.