$30.00
Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
17 Posts

Triumph & Tragedy» Forums » Rules

Subject: invasion ? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
egrimm egrimm
France
flag msg tools
The rules precise,that a undefeat minor can be "invade" by a rival of the attacker, without breaking neutrality.

So when player fail to capture the capital, an other player can come and take POP and RES from an other territory by placing his troups, without any inconvenient ?

But what's happen when the capital fall ? Does the troup of the INvader stay in the country ? Occupying then a rival territory without declaring war ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Craig Besinque
Canada
New Denver
BC
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Egrimm,

Owning a Capital only gives automatic control of all unoccupied areas of that nation.

So an Intervening Power maintains control of friendly-occupied areas (even after the Capital is captured by a Rival) as long as occupation is maintained. However, any areas left unoccupied in future would revert to Capital control.

There is no DoW issue as neither Power has Aggressed (entered territory belonging to the other).

Clear?

Craig
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Sosa
United States
Newark
Delaware
flag msg tools
badge
I will break him.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Are Violation of Neutrality costs ever paid more than once?

Say Axis attack Finland, failed to take their capital (twice). Axis withdraw from Finland. Russians attack Fins, VoN?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Clarke
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
badge
Loving Hardcore History with Dan Carlin
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
15.4 Violation of Neutrality
Except for passing through a Straits, players
cannot enter Neutral Territory (including
Associates and Protectorates), without
previously declaring a Violation of
Neutrality (VoN), which converts the
Neutral into an Armed Neutral (15.42).

VoN's only happen against Neutrals (including Associates and Protectorates), not Armed Neutrals.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Let's say the Soviet player invades Poland, and captures the eastern areas. In turn, the German player invades Warsaw but fails to capture it. In the next season, the Soviet player invades Warsaw, which now has units from both the armed neutral and the German player.

1. Does the Soviet player have to issue a DOW against Germany before moving into Warsaw?

2. If so, there are now three warring factions in Warsaw. Does the remaining Polish unit fire on the Soviet player? Does the Soviet player get to choose whether to attack the Polish unit or the German units?

Thanks.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Sosa
United States
Newark
Delaware
flag msg tools
badge
I will break him.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DieterS wrote:


1. Does the Soviet player have to issue a DOW against Germany before moving into Warsaw?


Yes
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
egrimm egrimm
France
flag msg tools
Quote:

There is no DoW issue as neither Power has Aggressed (entered territory belonging to the other).


So if we fallow this way, we encounter this exeptionnal situation were there is a rival occupying one of our Satelitte. And we can't push him out without DoW.

I'am right ?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug DeMoss
United States
Stillwater
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
egrimm wrote:
Quote:

There is no DoW issue as neither Power has Aggressed (entered territory belonging to the other).


So if we fallow this way, we encounter this exeptionnal situation were there is a rival occupying one of our Satelitte. And we can't push him out without DoW.

I'am right ?


Yes. That sounds suspiciously like what really happened in 1939.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
egrimm egrimm
France
flag msg tools
Quote:
2. If so, there are now three warring factions in Warsaw. Does the remaining Polish unit fire on the Soviet player? Does the Soviet player get to choose whether to attack the Polish unit or the German units?


The neurtal polish Unit fight against the Axis during Axis combat phase, and fight angainst Russia during Russia combat phase.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
juerg haeberli
msg tools

Yes you are right.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Thank you.

I've not seen one, but I suppose three-way land battles are possible between enemy powers as well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug DeMoss
United States
Stillwater
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've seen a three-way over Berlin.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Boschen
United States
Santa Cruz
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think you gents may be missing a very critical rule regarding VoN's:

15.422 Partition
While an Armed Neutral remains
undefeated, Rivals of the Violator
can enter its Territory and attack its
units without VoN penalty. (Entry into
Rival-occupied Land Areas, however,
will still require a DoW.)

15.423 Intervention
An Enemy of the Violator can convert
an Armed Neutral into a Satellite (8.2)
by moving a Ground unit into its Ter-
ritory. If this is done, at the end of the
Movement Phase exchange all sur-
viving Armed Neutral Fortresses for
equal-CV Intervenor units of any type.

Every single time an enemy of a violator (ie a second human player) moves into the territory of an already armed neutral, it ALWAYS results in a partition or intervention (at the second player's discretion).
To summarize the above:
If second player declares war on first, they acquire all territories and units of the armed neutral (minus any areas that the first player still occupies with units). If second player elects not to DoW then partition happens, and second player fights neutral forces but does not trigger VoN penalty (other two players don't get to draw cards).


I hated this rule when I first started playing, but it's growing on me. I didn't like that you can just tip toe on to the corner of a violated neutral and take the whole armed neutral nation and its armies. Feels like a huge swing against the first player who probably didn't roll well and failed to smash the capital in the previous season.

Hope this makes sense. Perhaps others can clarify from a fresh perspective.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Doug DeMoss
United States
Stillwater
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fly Casual wrote:

I hated this rule when I first started playing, but it's growing on me. I didn't like that you can just tip toe on to the corner of a violated neutral and take the whole armed neutral nation and its armies. Feels like a huge swing against the first player who probably didn't roll well and failed to smash the capital in the previous season.


I agree, it's not really all that bad and it DOES allow you to more-or-less reproduce the historical partition of Poland.

The biggies to notice are that

1) it either doesn't apply or isn't meaningful for the majority of neutrals
2) you have to be AT WAR, not just a rival, to actually take control of the former neutral.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Boschen
United States
Santa Cruz
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DieterS wrote:
Let's say the Soviet player invades Poland, and captures the eastern areas. In turn, the German player invades Warsaw but fails to capture it. In the next season, the Soviet player invades Warsaw, which now has units from both the armed neutral and the German player.

1. Does the Soviet player have to issue a DOW against Germany before moving into Warsaw?

2. If so, there are now three warring factions in Warsaw. Does the remaining Polish unit fire on the Soviet player? Does the Soviet player get to choose whether to attack the Polish unit or the German units?

Thanks.


Excellent questions and examples DieterS!

1. Yes. Soviet must DoW Germany in order to move units into Warsaw because German units already occupy it.

Further explanation: let's rewind a bit. When the German player attacks Poland (which previously became armed neutral thanks to Russian aggression in East), German player has a choice: A. Declare war on Russia and do an intervention causing neutral units to join him, or B. NOT declare war on Russian player and thus cause a partition, meaning German fights neutral polish forces in Warsaw WITHOUT triggering violation of neutrality (no cards from for Allies/Soviets).

2. Yes to all. Reasoning: Soviet is the violator, therefore the enemy of Polish forces. Germany is NOT a violator (closer to "liberator" as distasteful as that sounds). So polish forces attack the Russian violators first until they are destroyed. Germans may attack armed neutral pols, but they would be smarter to attack Russian forces. Germans may also split their fire when declaring targets (Ill advised, but an option none the less).

Belisarius88 wrote:
Are Violation of Neutrality costs ever paid more than once?

Say Axis attack Finland, failed to take their capital (twice). Axis withdraw from Finland. Russians attack Fins, VoN?


Yes. You said it precisely.

15.42 Armed Neutrals
An Armed Neutral is considered a sepa-
rate independent Faction and an Enemy
of its Violator. Upon a VoN, remove all
Influence markers (Diplomacy no longer
affects that Nation) and deploy Neutral
Fortresses in its Cities/Towns according
to their Muster Values [see Map Key].
(Note: A Colony that became an Armed
Neutral when its Major Power was
Defeated may still be Violated and will
follow the same VoN process,
except
that its Fortresses are already in place).

Basically an Armed Neutral has only one enemy player at a time, that is whomever first violated their neutrality. Subsequent players who partition are not violators, as long as the violating nation is still occupying a neutral territory.

If Russia violates and is defeated in detail, and does not have troops occupying any polish territores, then Poland's diplomatic stance resets, and Germany can become the violator of neutrality.

The problem with all of these scenarios is that the second nation should heavily consider intervening (see my post above) because interventions are CRAZY powerful and cause a huge shift in the struggle. The only cost of intervention is going to war (not insignificant, but often inevitable anyway).

Hope this helps, it feels complicated but the rules are clear if not explicit.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Boschen
United States
Santa Cruz
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Regarding who an Armed neutral fires at in a three way battle: Craig may have to weigh in. I see several options:

1. violating player forces = only valid target.

2. third human player chooses targets for armed neutral forces (always starting with ground forces as per rules).

3. 2nd aggressing player causes an intervention when they DoW the first player (violator) and move into territory occupied by 1st player, even though they formerly had a partition.

I may have to edit my post above, if I was wrong

Edit: I think option 3 in bold is correct. Craig will have to verify, unless someone else can provide evidence.

Also, this entire string of events is rare, as intervention is often much more beneficial. If not intervention, then maintaining a partition is often mutually beneficial. Declaring war after having already partitioned (which is the scenario in question) is much less common in my experience (as in, never happens). It CAN happen tho.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmb

Very nicely explained, Dave. Thank you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.