Can air units fly over a strict neutral, if other units are also attacking that neutral?

The confusion seems to be in you’re holding back naval ships for naval bombardment. The advantage about scrambling planes is that it forces the attacker to commit all their naval ships regardless if they want to or not. That’s why it is sometimes wise to scramble in a losing battle if the enemy is relying on bombardment for victory. The easiest situation would be when Japan invades the Philippine islands. If Japan was so aggressive that all they brought was two infantry with two cruisers as example. I would scramble the fighter in that situation because while I will lose the sea battle, if you choose to invade the island after the battle, you’re doing it without naval support which gives my defending infantry a better chance at winning.

Thanks for the replies everyone.

As it happens, there was some confusion about when the planes actually landed, so it turns out both my opponent and I were correct in a sense.

The UK planes actually landed on Greece during Italy’s turn after an adjacent UK carrier was damaged, so the move was legal after all.

My bad for incorrectly believing the planes landed on Greece during the UK turn, and neither of us realized what the other was talking about.  :-D

Good to see our fellow AAAers always ready to help out with good answers, though, so thanks again all.  :-)

Right, Holland is treated as an already vanquished non-playable ally, like France. On that note, French territories after Paris falls should be treated in the same way, at least the UK could grab some extra income in West Africa, Madagascar & Syria. Would also encourage Germany to take Normandy.

I guess the implication of ‘activating’ friendly neutrals is having to wait for them to fully mobilize. Also not sure why you’d need a combat unit, why can’t an AAA do it? It has a built in support staff and troops.

I’m really not at all keen on the whole Mongolia thing! And it’s not even worth any IPCs! That’s just plain mean; it should have been worth at least 1.  :-(

Thanks alot!

@techroll42:

Actually, IIRC, there’s a helluva good reason: Mongolia. IIRC Mongolia doesn’t convert if USSR declares war.

Nope.  Only if Russia attacks a Japanese controlled territory bordering Mongolia before Japan does the same.  That means Manchuria almost specifically, but also addresses if Russia were to attempt to liberate Japanese held Chinese territories adjacent to Mongolia.  Note that Japan is free to attack chinese territories occupied by Russian soldiers and that will result in no penalty, as they are chinese (not russia) territories.

There’s absolutely nothing that penalizes either for a state of war between them.  It’s better for Japan if the US can’t land bombers in Russia and if the reds don’t reinforce china or india, but there’s NOTHING that prevents Russia from declaring war R1 and freeing movement for themselves (and their allies) on the pac board.

Soviet/Japanese Non Aggression Pact: Due to their mutual border conflct with Japan in 1939, the Soviet Union and Mongolia have a special relationship. If the Japanese attack any Soviet territory that is adjacent to any Mongolian territory, all Mongolian territories (Olgiy, Dzavhan, Tsagaan-Olom, Central Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar, and Buyant-Uhaa) that are still neutral are placed under the control of the Soviet Union at the end of the Japanese Combat Move phase, in the same manner as though the Soviet Union had moved land units into a friendly neutral territory. These territories have Soviet control markers placed on them, and their standing army units are placed on the board and are controlled by the Soviet Union player from then on. This occurs regardless of the state of relations between the Soviet Union and Japan at the time of the attack, with one exception: If the Soviet Union attacks any Japanese-controlled territory bordering these Mongolian territories while Mongolia is still neutral, Mongolia will remain neutral and not ally itself with the Soviet Union. In addition, the Mongolian territories will never become pro-Axis unless one or more of them is attacked by the Soviet Union.

Attacking is different from declaring war.  Japan and Russia are free to declare war on each other without ever attacking each other at any time, over the entire length of the game.

Thanks James again!!!  New to the forum today, and AAG 40 so will find the nuggets like the errata you gave me.  Tanks a gun!

Most of the NOs in Anniversary were simply dependent on a territory (or territories) being held by one side, so UK often gets a NO for the US controlling the Carolines in the Pacific, or the US getting a NO for the UK controlling France, or Russia getting a NO for the UK controlling Norway, Finland, and Poland.  It’s basically the same thing; ANZAC was closely connected to the UK still, having been colonies/territories in the British Commonwealth/Empire up until just before WW2, so a good deal of British economics was affected by the status of Australia and New Zealand, just as it was with Canada (which is recognized in the game as an independent nation with their own roundel, but controlled overall by the UK player).

You don’t have to have the same person control ANZAC and UK for the NO to make sense, just like you don’t have to have the same player control the US and UK in Anniversary.