Strategic Movements Mechanic

[Chacmool]

Moving out of a contested territory
When moving out of a contested territory units can only be moved to an adjacent territory and that territory must have had at least one of the moving player's units in it or the territory is controlled by moving player at the beginning of the turn.

I love this 2 movement rule although I think it should be allowed to move 2 tts into a contested tt that contains your powers units at the beginning of your turn to reinforce them. The trenches are already prepared so it should be easier to get there instead of a hostile zone. I'm going to let this rule stand as is... You certainly stopped me in my tracks but I concluded, at least for now, that movements into a hostile or contested territory can only be made during the units 1st movement.


The new naval withdrawing and movement rule weakens subs and cruisers, since subs had been the only units that were allowed to withdraw (submerge). Maybe make Battleships 15 IPCs worth. Not interested in doing that.

[Striker]

About to start a new test game.
During the movement phase all land units can be moved into a maximum of 2 territories. However, movement into a hostile or contested territory can only be made during the unit's 1st movement. and such a move ends a unit's movements.

How does this interact with enemy territories that are empty? Can a unit from a territory one space way immediately capture it, and then allow a stack two spaces away move into that territory? From what I can tell the original rules only say a territory is "contested" when enemy units exist within it.

See KYR's comments below. Additionally, remember that all movement is concluded before combat is conducted.

[KimRYoung]

How does this interact with enemy territories that are empty? Can a unit from a territory one space way immediately capture it, and then allow a stack two spaces away move into that territory? From what I can tell the original rules only say a territory is "contested" when enemy units exist within it.

Striker, the status of a territory is always determined as to what it was at the begining of the players turn, so even if you capture a hostile territory, its still considered hostile for all other moving units this turn. These ar OOB rules.

Kim

[KimRYoung]

Unrestricted Submarine Warfare
I want to try this out... On the US and then again during the British turn, the Germany player will roll 1 die for each German submarines in sea zones 2, 7, and/or 8. Each die roll of 4 or higher are ignored and all others are totaled. The attacked power (US or Britain) will deduct 1 IPC from the income it collects during the Collect Income phase.

I think you mean the "total" of the rolls is deducted, not 1 IPC correct?

(the Global 1940 sub rule)

Kim

Yes of course... I'll correct that.

Now reads:
Unrestricted Submarine Warfare
I want to try this out... On the US and then again during the British turn, the Germany player will roll 1 die for each German submarines in sea zones 2, 7, and/or 8. Each die roll of 4 or higher are ignored and all others are totaled. The attacked power (US or Britain) will deduct this totaled amount from the income it collects during the Collect Income phase.

[VonLettowVorbeck1914]

Would you be comfortable if the movement rate was 3 instead of 4?

Personally, I don't think making the 2 movement possible by land units in controlled territories makes ANY naval movement increase necessary for balance between land and sea movement. It's not nearly as drastic as the original idea, so any naval changes should be likewise less drastic IMO.

But yes, given the choice between 3 and 4, 3 would be preferable.

(Aside: 4 movement could be cool and balanced with land if naval units moving more than their normal move were not able to move into hostile SZ's, not able to participate in combat, and not able to unload into hostile or contested territories (or at least not battle that turn if unloaded into contested), but it sounds like you weren't too keen on it before so this is as far as I will take it.)

[KimRYoung]

Would you be comfortable if the movement rate was 3 instead of 4?

Personally, I don't think making the 2 movement possible by land units in controlled territories makes ANY naval movement increase necessary for balance between land and sea movement. It's not nearly as drastic as the original idea, so any naval changes should be likewise less drastic IMO.

But yes, given the choice between 3 and 4, 3 would be preferable.

(Aside: 4 movement could be cool and balanced with land if naval units moving more than their normal move were not able to move into hostile SZ's, not able to participate in combat, and not able to unload into hostile or contested territories (or at least not battle that turn if unloaded into contested), but it sounds like you weren't too keen on it before so this is as far as I will take it.)

Or pull another rule from Global 40 (nice with the subs!). Add +1 to all ships movement that begin their move from a friendly port!

The ships are all coaled up, plenty of supplies and can make a longer voyage before haveing to re-coal

Kim

[Striker]

See KYR's comments below. Additionally, remember that all movement is concluded before combat is conducted.

Striker, the status of a territory is always determined as to what it was at the begining of the players turn, so even if you capture a hostile territory, its still considered hostile for all other moving units this turn. These ar OOB rules.

(ANSWERED)

Fair enough. You say they are OOB rules Kim, I can't find a passage that says it myself.(specificaly that they are determined at start of player's turn). Can you give a page reference? or is this one of the things to be FAQ'd?

I also restate the the OOB rules do not mention explicitly how to handle moving into an empty enemy territory(It only talks about moving into an enemy territory that contains there enemy units). I know common sense dictates you take control of it, but "when" was the question due to me not being able to find when you determine the status.

[Krieghund]

One thing to bear in mind when comparing land and sea movement is that sea zones generally tend to be about two or three times as large as territories on this map. As a result, sea movement is already faster than land movement even if land and sea units have the same movement rates.