Krieghund - Landing Russian units on UK?


  • Customizer

    With 36 pages of FAQ, there is alot to look through.  I started, but stopped at page 16.

    Can Russia land units on UK territory if Russia is at war with Japan, but not Germany/Italy?



  • This is a open topic that was not officially solved.

    At first thought from our master krieghund apparently yes. But seems not logical.

    The rules will be altered probably with the following sentence:

    “While Russia is not at war with one or both european axis powers, Russia treats all allies as neutral and vice-versa”


  • Official Q&A

    The way the rules currently read, yes.  This may be changed in the FAQ.



  • Russia is technically in the Axis until G4 if no aggression takes place, I have a problem with UK units being able to land in Russian territories before then and vice versa.



  • @MaherC:

    Russia is technically in the Axis until G4 if no aggression takes place, I have a problem with UK units being able to land in Russian territories before then and vice versa.

    Why is it technically in the axis? It can’t enter axis territory unless it declares war on japan.



  • Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact?

    Soviet attempts to join the axis as 4th player in 1940?  (German-Soviet Axis talks)

    Japanese-Soviet Nonaggression Pact?  4/13/41

    Things like that…

    The DOW’s and such of G40 follow a historical timeline.  Otherwise the USSR would be able to attack Germany on R1.



  • @MaherC:

    Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact?

    Soviet attempts to join the axis as 4th player in 1940?  (German-Soviet Axis talks)

    Japanese-Soviet Nonaggression Pact?  4/13/41

    Things like that…

    Trade agreement=/=military alliance
    Is not allowed in game, so Russia not axis
    Germany and Poland also had a nonagression pact. Therefore, Poland was an axis power.



  • Game starts with Poland already split up per the terms of the MR pact.  Game does start in 1940 after all.  Poland was done by 9/6/39.



  • Back to my point.  If Russia cannot attack on R1, then they should be considered locked or OOP on the Europe board unless acted upon by the EU Axis.



  • @MaherC:

    Back to my point.  If Russia cannot attack on R1, then they should be considered locked or OOP on the Europe board unless acted upon by the EU Axis.

    They should at least be able to attack neutrals, like they did historically(Baltic States, Bessarabia, Poland)



  • i have had this debate also and the simplest solution seems to be until they are at war with the same power they arent allied



  • @Krieghund:

    The way the rules currently read, yes.  This may be changed in the FAQ.

    When will they be out?



  • Perhaps Russia should be treated like UK.

    Split the boards: Russia may be neutral on the Europe board and at war on the Pacific board.

    It follows the example of UK splitting their income and is a simple way to state it while avoiding confusing scenarios.

    Hope that “May” comes to pass. Either way, this is my favorite game now. Thanks Larry, Kevin and the gang for more years of entertainment to look forward to.



  • @JamesAleman:

    Perhaps Russia should be treated like UK.

    Split the boards: Russia may be neutral on the Europe board and at war on the Pacific board.

    It follows the example of UK splitting their income and is a simple way to state it while avoiding confusing scenarios.

    Hope that “May” comes to pass. Either way, this is my favorite game now. Thanks Larry, Kevin and the gang for more years of entertainment to look forward to.

    Thats an interesting way to look at the political situation, USSR gets to spend the 9IPCs on the Pacific board in those territories, perhaps only INF buys and placed anywhere like china buys? Helps round out USSR in the global game when they get 18 extra inf and +9IPCs and Germany gets nothing extra.


  • Official Q&A

    @Stefano1189:

    @Krieghund:

    The way the rules currently read, yes.  This may be changed in the FAQ.

    When will they be out?

    I don’t know for sure, but sometime in November is probably a good bet.



  • @cressman8064:

    @JamesAleman:

    Perhaps Russia should be treated like UK.

    Split the boards: Russia may be neutral on the Europe board and at war on the Pacific board.

    It follows the example of UK splitting their income and is a simple way to state it while avoiding confusing scenarios.

    Hope that “May” comes to pass. Either way, this is my favorite game now. Thanks Larry, Kevin and the gang for more years of entertainment to look forward to.

    Thats an interesting way to look at the political situation, USSR gets to spend the 9IPCs on the Pacific board in those territories, perhaps only INF buys and placed anywhere like china buys? Helps round out USSR in the global game when they get 18 extra inf and +9IPCs and Germany gets nothing extra.

    Actually, I wasn’t referring to income, just split status of neutral/war for Russia. Meaning, USSR could be neutral in Europe and at war in Pacific. The particular board would be used to decide if USSR can attack a neutral/land in an ally/etc. based on that boards war “status”. Hopefully, this could be considered as a fair solution.



  • Forget the split.

    The rule should be:

    1 SU is neutral to the other allies (even if it is at war with Japan) until it is at war with one or both european axis powers.

    2 While not at war with each other, Japan are neutral to UK and ANZAC, so their air units cannot fly over each other territories



  • @calvinhobbesliker:

    They should at least be able to attack neutrals, like they did historically(Baltic States, Bessarabia, Poland)

    Again, we’re talking about G40 here.  Those regions are not Neutral in the OOB setup I see.  Russia starts with E Poland, Bessarabia and the Baltics.  No need for them to attack any of those on R1, they took them on R-Zero.


  • '15 Official Q&A '11 '10 Moderator

    Reiterating my opinion that Russia should NOT be able to share a territory with the Allies until USSR is at war with Euro-Axis.

    (Trying to tip the scales so it IS included in the FAQ)



  • Allowing Russia to force a German DOW is a bit broken in a game that seems to lean towards the allies already. If the allies were struggling to win, I could see making the argument to let them do so. As it stands, I think the allies are strong enough.



  • @Krieghund:

    @Stefano1189:

    @Krieghund:

    The way the rules currently read, yes.  This may be changed in the FAQ.

    When will they be out?

    I don’t know for sure, but sometime in November is probably a good bet.

    Yeah, November.



  • @JamesAleman:

    Allowing Russia to force a German DOW is a bit broken in a game that seems to lean towards the allies already. If the allies were struggling to win, I could see making the argument to let them do so. As it stands, I think the allies are strong enough.

    A-FREAKIN’-MEN!!!



  • @MaherC:

    @calvinhobbesliker:

    They should at least be able to attack neutrals, like they did historically(Baltic States, Bessarabia, Poland)

    Again, we’re talking about G40 here.  Those regions are not Neutral in the OOB setup I see.  Russia starts with E Poland, Bessarabia and the Baltics.   No need for them to attack any of those on R1, they took them on R-Zero.

    Yeah, those tt are not neutral to start. OOB shows Russia’s aggression, and they are “RED”. However, I think that Russia (as an aggressive nation) should be given the right to invade any of the remaining neutrals that it can get to w/o a DOW w/Japan. War w/Japan really has nothing to do with what Russia does in Europe/Middle East. Invading neutrals should just be part of Russia’s political situation rules IMO (expand the Empire). If this clause is changed (DOW w/Jap allows Russia to invade neutrals before its at war w/Euro axis) you would have a better chance of putting a NAP together too (would only concern Jap/Russian relations). Russia did invade NW Persia (as UK took control of the rest). Stalin wanted access to the just finished rail lines (Soviet interests-trade routes, protect its Caucasus oil etc), plus Stalin didn’t want UK that close to its boarders either (trust issues). As far as Russia going further in the middle east, that’s up to the allies to sort out (I think that’s why Larry made Persia 3 tt’s). Russia can’t get to Bulg, Yogo, or Greece (blocked by Romania). Furthermore if the German player makes a blunder, and forgets to invade Finland, the Russian player should be able to take advantage.

    Just for the record I think that Russia should stay out of all UK tt until officially at war w/Euro axis (and vise versa).



  • @WILD:

    OOB shows Russia’s aggression, and they are “RED”. However, I think that Russia (as an aggressive nation) should be given the right to invade any of the remaining neutrals that it can get to w/o a DOW w/Japan.

    Well…  Maybe to simulate Russia’s aggression, it should have a different diplomatic relationship than the other allies with regards to neutrals.  Specifically, proallied neutrals are hostile to the USSR and are only friendly to the Western Powers (UK, ANZAC, US, France), which makes sense, considering that “control” is given under the assumption that the neutral power maintains sovereignty.  And as history demonstrated, nations that the Soviets liberated were certainly not necessarily sovereign after ww2.

    So russia can “attack” whatever pro allied or proaxis neutral it wants from the outset of the game, but they are all attacks, have to be combat moves, and they can NEVER gain free units from those territories (gotta attack them, or let a western ally control them).  So after round 1 maybe they’ll be allowed to get Persia, but it will involve an attack and they don’t get free fodder.

    I still wish that the rules, with all this DOWs and such, simply added some Russian diplomatic rules.  Bar them from having US or UK units in original USSR territories (instead remove them immediately and USSR can buy them at half cost rounded up the next round and replace them in their territories).  And similarly, they just should not be allowed in original Western Power’s territories EVER.  Russia should not be so simply “ally”.  It was a far more complicated and distrustful relationship of Axis and Allies and Russia.



  • kcdzim, all neutrals being hostel to Russia is very interesting, and probably more realistic (don’t think it will be adopted though). Russia being a hostel ally (not allowing units to mix w/western allies) is also historic and would give the game a good twist. The boards have shown some support for something like this in the past and would be a cool house rule. If the allies end up having an advantage in E40, or G40, adopting a hostel Russia could swing things back to center. Of course you could work in a lend lease program w/western powers and mobile industry so Russia could continue to build if Moscow falls.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 5
  • 3
  • 27
  • 25
  • 47
  • 4
  • 7
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

51
Online

13.9k
Users

34.2k
Topics

1.3m
Posts