A neutral power cannot make a move into a neutral territory (E40 rulebook, pg 15, “Powers Not at War with One Another” side bar, under “Neutral Powers”)

The Soviet Union is still considered to be a neutral power on the Europe map even if it is at war with Japan (E40 rulebook, pg. 37, continuation of Soviet Union’s “Political Situation, National Objectives, and Bonus Income”, under Political Situation)

Taking both of these rules together, the Soviet Union must be at war with either Germany, Italy, or both to move into any neutral territory, pro-Axis, pro-Allies, or strict on the Europe Map.

So the answer to your question is a definite no.

Thank you for all of your responses.

@Karl7 The reason the rules at the end of the two 1940 rulebooks are not sufficient is that it is just a list of changes to the combined game. Also, some rules are only in the Pacific rulebook and not in the dominant Europe rulebook, therefore it would be nice to have all the rules that apply to G40 in one place.

I would like to create and make public to the A&A community a document that treats G40 as its own game (i.e. format a rulebook that is explicitly for G40).

But I first need to know if this is legal, or if it would violate copywrite law (even if it is free as this would be).

Does anyone have the answer to this?

Here is one way to do this:

The goal of the game is to hold 19 victory points at the end of a round (after US turn).

Each VC held is worth one point and each NO currently completed is worth one point with the following exceptions:

• For any NO that says “at least one of the following” a point is gained for each of the territories listed.

• The USSR’s NO that is worth 10 IPCs is worth two points.

(The exceptions ensure an equal number of points can be gain from NOs for each side.)

In the 1941 scenario (for which these rules are made)
The Allies would start with 17 victory points
The Axis would start with 8 victory points (If Japan takes Philippine Islands the Axis would have 10 and the Allies 15)

I wish to implement the NOs as additional options for victory.

This would mean a certian number of VCs or NOs would be enough to win the game.

I will post my ideas on this later, but I want to know other people’s ideas on this.

@Corpo24: Thank you for posting and playtesting.  Glad to hear you found it balanced, but if you find a overpowering strategy please just post it here.

@ Argothair,  Sorry for not responding. I have been very busy over the past few months.  About the NOs being to powerful.  I reduced the NOs power by cutting down on the amount of NOs that are available instead of reducing the IPC bonus for collecting each.  And about the territories being faster to take, that is the whole point of the scenario, that it is faster.  This doesn’t mean I am set in stone on the NOs staying the same though, but I need data from games to edit/remove/add them.

@Corpo24: Thanks for playing!  Can you please provide some pros and cons you experienced?

@Caesar Seriona: Sorry for the misquote you now have on your post as I modified my post.

I know I sounded hypocritical by saying this is not a question than asking one, but my point of even posting it was to start a discussion.  I also wonder how many of you actually followed this rule.  This came to me when I was thinking about that classic A&A rule about you can only do Phases X, Y, and Z if your capital is taken.  I thought it was weird and made no sense definitely that your ally can’t heal your capital ships like you guy brought up.

By the way, the rule book actually addresses the issue of UK repairs (to an extent as you will soon see), as the Global rules state that “An economy whose capital is held by the Axis can’t collect income, spend IPCs, or repair units (pg. 35 of both rule books)”. The rule book also says that the two economies makes their own separate repairs so I am assuming that only repair your ships with Naval Bases on the territories that would belong to that economy who retains their capital should they fall into the hands of the UK.

But what economy would the Allied capitals fall under as they can never be controlled by the UK, as the definition of the economies in the rulebook rely on UK owning territories.  Therefore the rulebook (as far as I know) never say what economy the non-UK territories fall under…

The Europe rulebook (the one that has precedence in the normal rules according to the Global rules) on page 21 says “The original controller is still in the game but can’t collect income from any territories he or she still controls and can’t buy units. The player skips all but the Combat Move, Conduct Combat, and Noncombat Move phases until the capital is liberated. If that power or one on its side liberates the capital the original controller can once again collect income from territories je or she controls, including territories reverting control to him or her.”

This is not necessarily a question, but if I take this literally I must skip the Purchase and Repair units phase if my capital is captured  and lose my ability to repair capital ships!

Was this intended, by accident but should be taken as a rule anyway, or by accident and should be ignored?