HBG's Global War 1939 FAQ

[WILD BILL]

Continuation from dcandf5 a few posts back:

Q: If japan attacks dutch east indies when holland is in german control does this cause a provoked declaration of war with uk/anzac/commonwealth? I understand that all those dutch territories become pro allied because germany attacked holland. Just need some clarification

A: No. Japan would not provoke war with the U.K. in this case. Assuming no other provocations are made, the UK player could not declare war on Japan until turn 3."

I like how the rules for Holland play out. If Germany attacks Holland (to by pass Mag Line), or takes Paris, all Holland territories becomes pro allied (allies would need to NCM in to claim them, and units there). They are most likely to become pro allied G1.

This will allow the UK/Anz to claim the Dutch islands (and units on them) in the Pac which is cool, but Japan goes before the UK.

It is also possible (not probable) that the Germans don’t attack Holland, or take Paris G1, which would keep the DEI a strict neutral. In this case the Japanese would also be able to invade the DEI to capture them by rule w/o any consequences.

Borneo is undefended, and an easy invasion J1. Celebes is also an easy mark w/bombardment.

Japan is allowed to invade the DEI (still Dutch) as pro allied or strict neutrals w/o provoking war w/FEC (UK) seems a little off, but OK that’s cool because that’s how the pro allied & strict neutrals work.

The US would find this very alarming in either case. Shouldn’t a Japanese invasion of any of the DEI while Dutch (as pro allied neutral, or still strict neutral) at the very least ratchet up the US production level.

I propose you add something to the events list that increase US production level by at least +5 if the Japanese invade the DEI when they are still Dutch (either pro allied or still a strict neutral territory).

[Variable]

@WILD:

Ok let me reword it, was still in thought process before :?

Fortification question:
Oslo Fortification defends against an attack from any sz, does that refer to only amphibs?
Correct.

When a fortification says it def from any sz, does that include a paratrooper and other air units flying in from across a sz w/o an amphib??
No.

I’m looking at taking Oslo with inf from Narvic, and air & paratroopers from Berlin (fling across the straight). Which of these units would be eligible targets for the fortification, and would this particular attack give +2 to the inf there?
In this case, the fortification would not aid Oslo. It is more of a coastal defense fortification that is used to defend against amphibious assault. What you are planning there is the benefit of using paratroops!

[WILD BILL]

OK, got it.

[WILD BILL]

Transports can off load into two territories adjacent to the same one sz in this game (very cool, long time house rule). Just wondering if you can also off load one unit in combat, and the other in NCM from the same transport (from the same sz of coarse). Could you also have one inf do an attack in one tt, and the other NCM in to reinforce another (or the same tt).

Another example:
One transport containing an inf & AA gun off loading to adjacent tt(s). Can you have the inf do amphib (combat), and then off load the AA gun (NCM) into the captured tt (or even a neighboring tt that is also adjacent to the same sz).

Sorry to bombard you with so many Q’s

[Variable]

@WILD:

Transports can off load into two territories adjacent to the same one sz in this game (very cool, long time house rule). Just wondering if you can also off load one unit in combat, and the other in NCM from the same transport (from the same sz of coarse). Could you also have one inf do an attack in one tt, and the other NCM in to reinforce another (or the same tt).

Another example:
One transport containing an inf & AA gun off loading to adjacent tt(s). Can you have the inf do amphib (combat), and then off load the AA gun (NCM) into the captured tt (or even a neighboring tt that is also adjacent to the same sz).

Sorry to bombard you with so many Q’s

You may unload the same transport in combat and non-combat as you described above. The only thing to keep in mind is each transport that is loaded in the Combat Phase MUST contain a unit that is going to be used in an attack. For example, you could not load 6 inf on a transport and attack with only one. You would have to attack with at least 3. Otherwise, these transports must be moved in the Non-Combat Phase.Also, the transport used in the Combat Phase could not be moved in Non-Combat.

[WILD BILL]

Last one for now Variable,

The US must end movement in a US tt, a sz next to US tt, or a US convoy zone until at war.

Are there any restrictions for Japan movement like in G40 Alpha+3. Do they have to keep a distance from the US mainland, or Alaska (maybe Hawaii). That sneak attack could actually force the US to retreat through Panama if the Japan navy floats along side it.

Japan navy (or any power) can share sz’s with powers they are not at war with correct.

[Tigerman77]

Question #20 about Japans taking the DEI. I envisioned the DEI as pro-allied but not effecting the US in any way. If there are any UK/Anzac/FEC units in a territory of the DEI and Japan attacks it obviously a declaration of war. Do we need to explain this rule any better?

Question #25 on Japan naval movement in US zones. Im still looking at this but I’m leaning to adding that Japanese units can not end their turn in the same zone as US units or in a sea zone next to a US territory. This will be explained in the next revision of the rules. As for now there is nothing in the rules stopping Japan from moving into US occupied sea zones.

[WILD BILL]

@Tigerman77:

Question #20 about Japans taking the DEI. I envisioned the DEI as pro-allied but not effecting the US in any way. If there are any UK/Anzac/FEC units in a territory of the DEI and Japan attacks it obviously a declaration of war. Do we need to explain this rule any better?

No, that is how it comes across to me in the rules and it works for the most part IMO. Allowing a Japanese invasion of the DEI (while Dutch) w/o any consequences is what feels a little off to me. Maybe just an inf added to def Borneo so that the Japanese can’t just walk in (don’t know for sure, but seems like something should have been stationed there).

Just thought that the US event list could include a direct Japanese attack on the DEI (while Dutch) as well, even if it lowered one of the others on the list (maybe the W Hemisphere to+25). The US wouldn’t have declared war over it, but I think it would have taken notice with blatant Japanese aggression w/oil embargo and all. Not a big deal, just a thought.

**BTW Western Hemisphere can also include parts of Africa, and Europe and small part of Russia in some interpretations (don’t think that is your intent). When you say W Hem you are talking about just the Americas and adjacent islands right. Where would Greenland and Iceland fall in your rules.

Also while I’m on the subject of W Hem, I heard there might be changes to the units placement in 4.1 (upgrade to 5.0). In our first game we found it way to easy for the UK to claim Brazil (which is fine), but to just walk into the other unoccupied S American countries was a joke. We will add 1-2 inf to each of them in our next game so there is some resistance, hope the update will do something along those lines.

@Tigerman77:

Question #25 on Japan naval movement in US zones. Im still looking at this but I’m leaning to adding that Japanese units can not end their turn in the same zone as US units or in a sea zone next to a US territory. This will be explained in the next revision of the rules. As for now there is nothing in the rules stopping Japan from moving into US occupied sea zones.

Ok, we will probably address it with similar restrictions until the rules get updated. Do you have any idea when the units placement and rules update will be. Are we talking soon, or a month from now?

Other things to consider in the update are including canal, and straight rules (don’t remember seeing anything, but I could be wrong). We are using G40 for that for the most part. You have ruled on the Dane straight can be used by anyone while Denmark is neutral, that doesn’t work for the Turks straight though. Is it closed from the start, or is there a trigger? Can subs move through the Gib straight?

Please don’t take these comments as criticism, we are having a great time in our first game and addressing minor things as we go. We are getting a lot of help along the way from this thread (you guys have been terrific).

**Edit, One last thing:
The role of a fighter has really change in this game. Ftrs have traditionally gotten a big def boost. I didn’t always get that because it would take time to get them in the air, but that’s the way it has always been. This game has them as a 6-6 unit. With the 12 sided dice system I would have thought they would def at 7 (not 8 which would be the same as 4 w/6D). As a whole air are pretty crappy defenders in this game. I guess it solves the allies flying ftrs to def Moscow LOL. Just seems strange seeing it be like a flying tank as far as values go on defense.

Is this under review?
Maybe give ftrs +1 from an operational air base when defending the territory the AB is in. An AB would include an early warning radar system that would allow for the +1 def value. Would need to tweak RAF in United Kingdom def to +1 (would also get +1 for AB making it +2).

Even if it was a limited +1 boost to a max of 3 ftrs def territory w/AB (maybe include tacs). Similar to an AB allows a limited number of ftrs/tacs (3) to scramble to SZs.

[koba]

Wild Bill,

I agree with your statement regarding the South American neutrals having no armies. As for Brazil, like you I don’t have a big problem with the Commonwealth being able to activiate them early on. One thing I wish, however, is that Germany had a small naval presence in the South Atlantic (a cruiser and/or U-boat for example).

I’d like to see clarification on Gibraltar too. We play it as the straight is impassable unless you hold it.

Some addtional rules I’d like to see are:

Blockhouses

Flaktowers

Coastal Battleships (they are in the game but there are no rules indicating their attack, defence, or movement values).
Coastal submarines (same as coastal battleships).

After playing a number of times and going over some of the historical aspects of the game, I suggest airfields be added to Wake and/or Midway island for the next set-up.

As and added note, we played this weekend and it went right to turn 15 with an Axis win.

[WILD BILL]

Was wondering about the neutral fleets. Some say coastal?, some aren’t noted? Can the coastal ships be moved at some point, or do they have to stay put throughout the game (until killed)?

If you activate the territory do you claim the adjacent fleet if it is pro your side. If you are attacking a neutral territory (strict or pro the other side), does the adjacent fleet become activated for the other side (they choose who gets it?) if you haven’t killed it.

[koba]

Wild Bill,

The country that the neutral is friendly to occupies the territory and claims the fleet(s). That’s how we play it anyway.

We keep ships listed as coastal on the coasts of the countries they started at. If they are moved, they have to stick to the coastline.

From what I understand, if a strict neutral is attacked it becomes a pro-axis/allied neutral. When a neutral is attacked, we have its navy placed on the board (if it was not already during the set-up). From thereon in it acts like a Vichy navy. It does not move but will fight if axis/allied ships (depending on who attacked the neutral) move into the sea zone. If the neutral is “liberated” by the other side and the fleet still exits, it goes over to the liberator. There is not an especially clear rule regarding these navies so we try to glean from the general rule regarding neutrals what to do with them. Hopefully Variable will be clearer than I am on this.

[WILD BILL]

1. Ok so in case of Recife (Brazil) if UK NCM a ground unit to Recife, then it claims the troops there along with the battleship & transport. Both ships are absorbed (become UK). The transport is allowed to go wherever (not listed as coastal), but the battleship (coastal) has to stay in either sz 55, or 51 along the Brazilian coast for the entire game.

2. Say Italy manages to get a couple transports and a destroyer to Brazil before the allies activate any of the territories. If they wanted to attack Recife via sz55 they would have to kill the battleship first. So instead they invade Boa Vista (unoccupied) via sz51 with the intention of attacking the inf on Recife next turn. The allies can’t use the battleship in sz 55 to attack sz 51, because Recife wasn’t activated yet, so the BB just watches things unfold. The Brazilian fleet would be stuck in sz 55 until the allies could liberate Recife, or the axis kill it.

3. Spain could become pro axis if certain events happen (Paris and one of the Russian VC’s are controlled by axis, or the allies attack it). So once Spain is pro axis if Germany or Italy NCM to Seville they would also claim the Spanish fleet in sz36. The sub (coastal) would def or attack only along the Spanish coast line (sz’s 28,32,34,35,36,&37), but the other ships are free to go wherever.

4. Say Spain becomes pro axis (Paris & Leningrad are captured by Germany). The US attacks Barcelona, and then takes Seville before the axis activate it. The Spanish fleet in sz36 isn’t claimed by the US because it is pro axis right. The Spanish fleet is stuck in sz36 until either the axis liberate Seville (then it can do what it does in #3 above), or the allies kill it.

5. Say that Germany gets impatient, and attacks Barcelona (Spain) as a strict neutral. The other two Spanish territories become pro allies, along with the Spanish fleet in sz36. The fleet can never become axis now, and is stuck there until the allies activate/liberate Seville, or it gets killed.

6. Sweden would be like Spain as similar events unfold.

[koba]

In all the cases you listed, that’s how we play it (for lack of any clarification regarding neutral navies in the rules).

We should ask Variable to include more direction on this in the 5.1 rule set.

[WILD BILL]

Agreed, looking forward to 5.1, and an updated unit set-up chart (S American units?).

Here is some food for thought (maybe just a house rule).

If a neutral country is attacked (anywhere) if it has a fleet, the other side (axis or allies) can use the fleet along that country’s coastline to attack or defend (whole fleet basically becomes coastal for a time). The side opposite of the attack would just choose what power gets temporary control (most likely UK or Germany). It is still neutral until the capital is activated, or liberated by the appropriate side at which point the navy is claimed and the ships that aren’t listed as coastal can be moved away from the coast.

This would allow the larger neutral nations to defend their coastlines through attacks once neutrality was breached, or possibly move its fleet out of harms way.  I’m good with how things work now (assuming we got that right in the other posts), but just thought that if a nation is directly attacked they should be able to use what ever is at their disposal.

I would even go as far to say that once attacked, if that nation has multiple territories, any of their ground troops should also be able to NCM move or attack within their borders. They would be fully absorbed once the appropriate power activates or liberates their capital. Just put them in the UK turn (they would have the influence in most cases for the allies, and everyone else is in UK’s turn),  Germany (if axis in Europe) or the power awarded temporary control (closest ties politically?). Would also look at once you activate a nations capital, you are in control of all their territories, units and fleet (no attack needed), but that might be pushing it a bit.

[koba]

Interesting,

How about rolling for the neutral fleets a la Vichy? I think it would add a cool dynamic to the game as an element of risk/reward.

[WILD BILL]

I like how the Vichy rules work, it will give each game a different flavor. This was the first time we used such a rule, and it was very cool rolling for all the territories to see where their loyalties are. Rolling for the fleet was the best part, there’s just something cool about splintering the French fleet (although most of it gets scuttled). I was Germany, and rolled pretty good I got Marseilles, a cruiser, most of N Africa etc… The Free French kept N Algeria and the combined Foreign Legion (bad luck they all lived) has regained most of N Africa now (at least the allies don’t get paid for them Edit: just realized the UK gets paid for Free French territories). Then I rolled the battleship which ended up Free French too “OUCH” LOL

Our first game is on pause (3rd-4th turn). We haven’t seen Spain, Sweden, or Turkey come into the game yet, so I haven’t experienced their impact (if/when Moscow falls being part of a trigger for some to become pro axis). Looking forward to it, and then will have a better perspective of if the dice could determine their fate. As the axis I’m thinking no, I want those units LOL.

[WILD BILL]

For Paratroopers/flying commandos what are the guidelines.

1. In order to para-drop do you also need to have other troops in the battle via land or sea (like G40).

2. Do they stop at the first hostel land territory (think that’s how it is in most AA games). In G40 airborne have a limit of 3 spaces (inf launched from an Air base). Using the range of a bmr w/AB could give airborne units a very long reach.

2a) Are you allowed to para-drop on Paris w/o first capturing the hostel territory(s) in between (say Normandy). Same for Berlin, do they have to first take W Germany (first hostel tt), or can they just attempt an all airborne attack on Berlin w/o holding a territory on the continent?  Russian territories could also be interesting if Germany builds an AB in W Ukraine or Romania and can drop on Stalingrad w/o first taking Kharkov for example. They could also drop deep into the Russian back-lands, landing bmr in Japanese held territories.

3. To add to the above first hostel territory, it might be cool if rules allowed:

If you are attacking the first hostel territory via land or sea, you’re allowed to para-drop into the next territory making the assumption you will win the first battle, and follow through with the airborne mission regardless of if you do or not. All combat is set-up at the same time. This would allow paratroopers to go deeper into enemy territories, or get caught behind enemy lines but still have some restrictions not being able to fly over 2-3 hostel territories, then attack/drop. The first hostel territory would have to be attacked by land or sea (no multiple airborne missions to get deeper into enemy territory). You could also treat it like an amphib were you have to win the first battle or else the airborne battle is called off.

Example 3a:
Would allow you to amphib Normandy, and also Para-drop on Paris in the same turn
Example 3b:
Germany blitzes into Kharkov (first hostel territory), and also Paratroops into a weekly defended Stalingrad in the same combat move from an air base built earlier in Romania.
Example 3c:
The UK storms W Germany via amphib, and then does an all air commando raid on Berlin. Would force the Germans to defend both the coast, and the capital.

Just looking at some of the scenarios like London could be invaded w/airborne only (unless #1 is ruled in) which is ok w/me. Berlin and Paris are land locked, but I don’t think you should be able to bypass the coastal territories and do Airborne only missions (allowing both the coast and inner capital to be attacked in the same turn might be ok). Same for Russian land grabs.

4. Bombers do also get to roll in the battle too when dropping airborne units at its attack value of 8 or less right?

5. If there is an AA gun protecting the territory, does it fire at both the bomber and airborne unit separately, or just the bomber, and the airborne unit is cargo at that point, and lost if the bmr goes down to AA fire. I think I would like it better if it was assumed the airborne unit jumped, and the bmr & trooper were fired on separately, but IDK. Should you be able to kill two units with 1 shot if you hit (bmr & trooper), or get twice as many shots firing at them separately?

6. Are def ftrs allowed to intercept bmrs (dropping paratroopers) if the territory under attack has an operational airbase forcing them to bring in escorts? I don’t think this last one is part of any rule, but something to think about if your doing some dog fight, or air supremacy house rules (oh the possibilities are endless LOL).

[dcandf5]

@dcandf5:

One more question…
Under sneak attack for japan, rules  state that japan receives 35 ipcs if they when they declare the intent to use the sneak attack. Do they declare right at the start of their turn ( before purchasing new units ) or do they declare during the combat move phase? This will lead to different scenarios.
If they declare it at the beginning of their turn, they will receive the 35 ipcs before purchasing of units. This will allow them to buy more units. In the second scenario, they would have received the ipcs after the buying units phase and cannot purchase units using the ipcs.

bump

[dcandf5]

and thanks for the replies guys

[WILD BILL]

I’m sorry to rehash this, but I found this quote from Tigerman77 back in Feb which conflicts Variable in Aug. Both cases site that the Germans attacked Holland, making the DEI pro allies (same thing happens if Paris falls). Then they go on to ask if the Japanese attack the DEI, does it provoke war w/UK. I know that if there are UK/Anz units there (they activated the Dutch pro allied tt) it would definitely provoke war, but in Feb Tigerman77 states that any attack on DEI while pro allied (still Dutch), will be a DOW on UK, which would ratchet up the US income 25 IPCs. Did this change when the rules were updated to 5.0 between Feb & Aug?

@Variable:

Please see answers in red:

@dcandf5:

Hey i got some questions…

If japan attacks dutch east indies when holland is in german control does this cause a provoked declaration of warer with uk/anzac/commonwealth? I understand that all those dutch territories become pro allied because germany attacked holland. Just need some clarification

No. Japan would not provoke war with the U.K. in this case. Assuming no other provocations are made, the UK player could not declare war on Japan until turn 3.

@Tigerman77:

It mentions that when/if Holland is attacked by Germany then all Dutch territories become Pro-Allies, I get that, but it doesn’t specify if Japan can attack unactivated Dutch territories (territories that haven’t been occupied by the Allies) without going to war with UK/Commonwealth/etc. I would assume that since it doesn’t mention it then its okay to attack them, but I know in the 1940 version if Japan attacks the DEI then that counts as a declation of war with UK/Anzac/US so I just wanted to clarify that.

If Japan attacks the DEI while they are strict neutral then there is no decleration of war. If Japan attacks thhe DEI while pro allied or with Allied units in the zones it will be a decleration of war against the UK/commonwealth.