China as a new sub-player

[losttribe04]

Yeah that seems kind of odd that Japan could not send a single unit to china and not have to send a single unit to a Chinese adjecent space and not have to worry about loosing it.

I’m sure this question has come up before but there has been some misinformation going around so I want to confirm:  Can other allies place units in China?

LT

[Krieghund]

@Atlantikwall:

So the chinese fgt can not attack in the sz off Hongkong even if there is a lonely trn?

No.  The transport will need to find someone else to keep it company.

@LT04:

I’m sure this question has come up before but there has been some misinformation going around so I want to confirm:  Can other allies place units in China?

That depends on what you mean by “place”.  Can they move them in?  Yes.  Can they build them there?  No.

[losttribe04]

@Krieghund:

@Atlantikwall:

So the chinese fgt can not attack in the sz off Hongkong even if there is a lonely trn?

No.  The transport will need to find someone else to keep it company.

@LT04:

I’m sure this question has come up before but there has been some misinformation going around so I want to confirm:  Can other allies place units in China?

Thanks for clearing that up.

LT

That depends on what you mean by “place”.  Can they move them in?  Yes.  Can they build them there?  No.

[Black_Elk]

I’ve mentioned this just about everywhere else I was able to, so I might as well voice it here as well. :D

Why are we designing China to collapse?

It makes zero sense according to the history and allows weird things to happen on the game board. China was a major theater of operations for the duration, and many historians mark the opening of WW2 in 37 with the Second Sino-Japanese War. To suggest that the Chinese contribution in the war against Japan was somehow irrelevant or insignificant to the broader global War is just totally misleading. 3,800,000 Chinese military personal died fighting in this part of the world. Compare that with the 417,000 US or 380,00 British military personal over the course of the entire conflict, and you start to get an appreciation for what I’m talking about. Its a joke for them to get crushed like they do in most games. They should at least be heavy enough on the inf to draw down some serious Jap firepower, and not just get blown off the map before the US has a chance to do anything meaningful in the Pacific.

I also dislike the idea of China as a sub player with different purchasing, placement and movement rules, distinct from everyone else. It adds to the overall complexity of the game, when we should be focusing on ease of use. In AAPacific it was different because everything was localized, and the more focused/tactical nature of the game made the inf pop rule seem less peculiar. In this case though, it just feels weird.

Also, I don’t see why everyone keeps making so much about the intestine fighting between the CPC and the KMT (even though there was a pretty stable truce in effect from 41-45). There were partisans and civil conflicts in other parts of the world during this period, which we’re perfectly happy to ignore, so why should this case be any different? The Chinese civil war did not flare up again in earnest until 46, so I don’t see why we should feel compelled to treat of it in this game.

I’ve got my fingers crossed and I’m hoping for the best out of AA50, but if we ever revisit the idea in another edition, I’d like to see a less ignominious role for China in it.

:)

[Bluestroke]

Greetings all,

More speculation China,
I have been staring at one picture from Gen Con.  It is the display showing a 90% 1942 2004 Revised Setup, plus new stuff. 
I note qty 9 Chinese Infantry, plus Fighter. 
I wonder if Larry has his own Oct surpise, with the 1942 setup.
By the way, I like Chinese troop restrictions, they were focused on China. 
I would hate to see Chinese troops in India.
nuff said.

[Romulus]

Historically China fought a hard and bloodly war against the Japan, as the 3,800,000 Chinese military personal died show.
USA and UK supported the Chinese effort.

However China had less impact on the high level strategy. When we speak of the leaders leading the Allies we speak of Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin. The DDay was planned to open the well-known “second-front” asked by Stalin. Operation Bagration was launched on 22th June 1944 to engage Germany Eastern Armies avoiding sending reinforcement in Normandy.

Also in AA50 there is need for a lot of cooperation between the allied powers. Allowing China to perform an high level strategy cooperation will seem a little bit strange. For example seeing Chinese infantry defending India or cooperating with Russian Army will be really strange. At moment I am curious to see how China works as sub-player because it seems to be more fitting  with a nation that fought a bloodly war but rarely looked over the boundaries of its country to participate in high level strategy planning.
If after several games played China will appear really weak and an easy prey for Japan then we can start to think to some home rule.

[Funcioneta]

We could talk about historical accuracy and China in this game for ages (why let Japanese armor blitzing merrily by mountain zones as Sichuan?), and about the bugs with her minor condition. But I agree with Romulus in a thing: let’s try a pair of games with OOB rules, and then, if China means 12 free IPCs for Japan, let’s mod China.

So, the order should be:

• Buy the game and learn the actual rules. I have very serious doubts about the deploy we know today.

• Play a pair of games with OOB

• After that, if China is broken, mod her

[italiansarecoming]

the only thing for chian i would hate to see is that they can biuld more then 2 tanks and 2 fighters

china shoudl be allowed a maximum for tanks and fighter of 2 each

also no bombers for china really china having bombers unrealistic and thats an eas way of bombing ipcs from japan that would b giving a edge up to the allies
who agrees with these things i posted + expecially the no bombers rule

[Imperious Leader]

I think something should be done, but if you have these rules you need to counter balance something else for the axis

[italiansarecoming]

like adding men for japan in japanese china and allowing gb to make only 1 ipc complex

[Funcioneta]

No to limiting UK ICs. Japan has enough advantage in Pacific with this (supposed) setup.

I think there is no need of nerfing a China with IC. First, If you think China can waste 15 ipcs in a bomber, I’d be happy of playing Japan. Second, China would suffer enough with Japan’s strat bombings. Third, a China with IC would need about 10-15 ipcs, thus giving more rich territories who could give Japan a greater reward. Fourth, give chinese IC as Japanese bonus, cancel Ottawa VC and make Chongquing a VC. Now allies would need defend China (and the whole Pacific). No more gamey KGF.

[italiansarecoming]

Japan was super duper strong in ww2 the allies were lucky aka dice rolls or in this case allowing them selves stay defensive and ge tthe extra attack value
i was playing a&ae and russia and germany were tied for strenght because the allies were threatening him aka me
so while i moved russia to attack him he was surprised

at the time had 25 ipcs i bought 1 plane 2 armour and 1 inf.
then attacked him i won because i had 7 tanks 1 died from the start ebcause i blitz an opening because he new that i wouldnt normally send a tankt here but it screwed him up to buy 1 bomber!
so when i attacked next turn i won defensive russia easy to handle, agressive russia hard

the point is it is luck and make china and japan have more men in asia show the reasons for rasian wars

[Lynxes]

One question regarding China and builds: do you determine the number of infantry in the “Purchase Units Phase” or in the “Place Built Units Phase”? The latter would be slightly better for the Chinese, but then again they will probably play very defensively so maybe the difference is slight?

[Krieghund]

China receives the infantry in the Purchase Units phase and places them in the Mobilization phase.

[Funcioneta]

Great, more bonuses for Japan against China. Japan can trade territories and gain the IPC. China cannot trade territories, not only because they lose the lone fighter they have, but also because they colect poping inf at begining of turn instead the usual colect income at end of turn.

Thinking ways of modding China to a true playable power …  :roll:

[Krieghund]

The rules say that Chinese units may not move outside of China.  They make no distinction between land and air units.  The Chinese fighter may not leave Chinese territory, even temporarily.  I checked with Larry on this, and he verified it.

[losttribe04]

I have not been following all that close so humor me please.  When China gets there new units can they bunch them into one space in the mobilize phase or do they have to spread them out?

Thanks,
LT

[Krieghund]

They may place them in any Chinese-held territories that don’t already have three or more Chinese units in them.  They may place them together or separately.

[losttribe04]

Thanks, Krieghund + 1.

LT

[Black_Elk]

Also in AA50 there is need for a lot of cooperation between the allied powers. Allowing China to perform an high level strategy cooperation will seem a little bit strange. For example seeing Chinese infantry defending India or cooperating with Russian Army will be really strange. At moment I am curious to see how China works as sub-player because it seems to be more fitting  with a nation that fought a bloodly war but rarely looked over the boundaries of its country to participate in high level strategy planning.
If after several games played China will appear really weak and an easy prey for Japan then we can start to think to some home rule

I can almost guarantee, that if you included China as a full faction they would be primarily preoccupied with their own defenses. If anything it’d be Indian and Russia troops helping to defend Chungking and not the other way around. In any case, the patterns of conflict can be easily determined by the unit set up. Right now China seems hopelessly neutered, with its own confusing ‘inf pop’ status and the inability to move outside its starting territories. I really dislike this idea of a Chinese defensive wall. I would rather the territories were under USA control, or else built into a seperate faction.

Also, I’m not impressed by the argument that a Chungking factory would be of more use to Japan than the Allies. Clearly if we were going to do something along these lines then we would design China to have a fighting chance in this game, and not just get blown off the map in two or three rounds.

:-)