@thedesertfox said in U.K 2 Economies Question:
… I would imagine it goes to the Europe UK since its on the Europe side of the board …
This is correct.
UK as one economy
-
I pitched the idea that Canada needs to be it’s own power and to balance this out, make UK has one economic power. Even HGB 1936 didn’t make Canada it’s own power when Canada acted on their own accord, they left UK in 1931.
-
I like making canada grey pieces and 2nd grey factory
-
@SS-GEN Exactly. If UK can dump 10 infantry into India anytime it wants then Japan will never take it and never take China.
Then they can build fighters for the Middle east/Russia there, saving on a factory, so UK’s entire game could be UK1 anti-Sea Lion buy, UK2 build in India and S. Africa until forever.
I mean… imagine UK 2 they do mechs/artillery, etc and then start buying navy with their combined 45 ipcs so the U.S. can spend all its money in Germany for 5 rounds.
-
If India is being mass defended, then it gives Germany and Italy more freedom in their theater of war, and because it doesn’t require both Axis Powers to win, it actually doesn’t change the outcome that much compared to OOB.
-
Then just keep India a minor factory and can’t up grade.
-
I might test this to see how well it works out. I wonder if the rule that India can only produce Infantry solves the issue?
-
Ya. As you probably know with HBG 39 game had a minor and could build 6 units but first three had to be inf. You could upgrade but then you’d have no money due to split economy’s but that’s why u could build 6 units instead of 3. Besides we figured out how to take Calcutta t3 every time.
-
1936 is a whole different kind of beast. I image if India can produce ten infantry a turn, that might stop Japan from taking India but it will not stop Italy from taking Egypt or Germany having so much freedom to crush USSR.
-
I meant 1st edition 39
-
Still HGB drove their game to be more realistic for both 36 and 39. G40 is a whole different beast. I think my method will work for G40.
-
I think many of the others are correct in assessing that India would need to be bumped down to a minor IC. Others also mentioned making Canada its own separate power, however, what if Canada is added on to ANZAC?
-
@Tirano There is a Commonwealth build you can find somewhere on G40 about it, there is two different versions which merge ANZAC and Canada as the Commonwealth and then another variant that adds South Africa into the Commonwealth.
-
@Tirano Yes I brought this up a couple of years ago–It gives grey more income, 6 more pieces and 2 factories and an “around the world strategy” where anzac can help in atlantic or pacific.
No one liked my idea. And it makes UKATL too weak with only 21-22 income.
-
I think it would only work with a combined UK income.
-
Yea you wouldn’t want to play it solo. Canada that is : )
I gave Canada a couple boosts in House Rules mod. Put a couple Canadian infantry in England too, which, if I remember right, CWO said was historically correct.
I think your Canadian addition Rocks personally : ) Although I’ve never tried the boosts in just the regular game, I think they’d make people think a bit. For a game or two anyway :)
-
@barnee In “Armored Tactics” by Stackpole books, the author makes the argument that Canada had the most advanced understanding of armored warfare in the interwar period among the allies. The US attempted to design vehicles and tactics from scratch, but still ended up imitating the role of a traditional cavalry arm, whereas the British, despite their experience in WW1 drew the wrong lessons and adopted the french approach of 2 (or more) types of breakthrough tanks vs fortress tanks along with integration of these types within traditional infantry formations–both of which proved disastrous (for france). As we know, the germans focused the effect of their limited armor by creating mobile breakthrough mechanized divisions that could locally overwhelm and outmaneuver the penny packets of potentially better french tanks that were often bypassed or abandoned, because the French did not have the concept of an armored reserve.
All of this is a long winded way of saying that the Canadians need a special RAM tank unit to be a true representation of their potential. Even though the canadians did not produce many (any) of their own vehicles from scratch, they apparently (according to this source) were the only allies who drew the correct conclusions from the experience of WW1 and the German developments of the interwar period.
-
I prefer to combine the UK economies, and make Canada/South Africa/ANZAC one power with three economies. Canada collects for the Americas, and Europe, South Africa collects for Africa, and the Middle East, and ANZAC collects for the rest of Asia, and Pacific islands. I feel like this breaks up UK enough that it doesn’t unbalance the game by combining UK economies, and brings Canada, and South Africa into the game as self ruling nations.
-
SiredBlood has rules for a combined UK economy that work pretty well; basically there is a 20 IPC/turn spending cap in India, and otherwise you just combine the entire UK + Canada + India + South Africa into one economy, with ANZAC remaining separate. If you don’t like the 20 IPC/turn rule, you could replace the major IC in India with a pair of minor ICs, one in India and one in West India.
ANZAC is interesting as a separate power because ( a ) they have a core cluster of facilities & 2-IPC territories of Queensland, New South Wales, and New Zealand that are far enough away from Japan to be defensible, ( b ) they have economic interests like Java and New Guinea that are close enough to Japan to make for immediate conflict, ( c ) they can realistically get up to 20+ IPCs in many games, which gives them options beyond just sitting and turtling, and ( d ) they are a convenient ‘junior partner’ for the US Pacific Navy, which allows them to punch above their weight.
None of these are true for Canada except for ( a ). It’s easy to defend Ontario and Quebec, but Canada doesn’t have any economic interests that put them into immediate conflict with any Axis powers, they have no realistic path to get to 20+ IPCs, and the British Atlantic navy isn’t strong enough in this version of the game to need or want a junior partner. It might be possible to radically adjust the starting setup so that the English-speaking countries have a larger total Atlantic navy that is split up less favorably among UK & Canada so as to preserve roughly the same level of power, or to have a larger Canadian navy that serves as a sort of Allied bid, but you can’t just split Canada off as its own power without tilting the power balance further in favor of the Axis. Even if you do fix the balance issue, it’s not obvious that Canada is a strategically interesting power on this map. I am very pro-Canada and have great respect for Canada’s historical wartime contributions, and I think thematically it would be a lot of fun to play a Canadian power, but I don’t think it’s a realistic goal mechanically for this map and setup.
-
Your points are well taken, Canada’s action early would be limited to mopping up the Atlantic of German subs (if they don’t lose what would become their sub and transport the first turn). They’d need a basic autonomy NO to pump their income and maybe they could get a reduced version of the UK’s no German subs bonus.
While they couldn’t do much once they land in UK or northern Africa they could open a few new angles going after Italy (would combine the turn with ANZAC’s). But I fear Canada’s best use would simply be to pump air units to UK/Russia from Quebec.
-
Maybe Canada would be more interesting with the option to provide lend-lease! It gives them a reason to maintain a navy beyond just chasing German subs for the heck of it.
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/33666/supply-token-for-lend-lease
Suggested Topics
