makes sense to me.
The emblems are there simply to honor Canada’s contribution to the Allied war effort. There have never been any plans to make Canada a separate power.
The emblems are there simply to honor Canada’s contribution to the Allied war effort. There have never been any plans to make Canada a separate power.
. In the pacific rulebook there is picture of the map where there is an british roundel on Canadian territory why did you decide to replace it.
Pity. Sounded good in my head. I like the idea that despite a country’s surrender there are always some that will find a way to prolong the struggle, but I understand you do not want to complicate things too much. I am sure the A&A community must be like the whole of Italy when it comes to football: 50 mlllion wannabe managers all better than the appointed professional.
The emblems are there simply to honor Canada’s contribution to the Allied war effort. There have never been any plans to make Canada a separate power.
Similarly, the Dutch East Indies are marked with Dutch roundels even though Holland isn’t a playing power in the game – and even though Holland itself shows up on the map as a joint territory with Belgium and doesn’t have a Dutch roundel on its home turf.
Finns deserved a roundel.
@Cow:
Finns deserved a roundel.
Yes that is true but then people would want rounel for South africa, Romania, Hungary, Luxemburg… you know where that would go
I blame Canada.
@Cow:
Finns deserved a roundel.
Yes that is true but then people would want rounel for South africa, Romania, Hungary, Luxemburg… you know where that would go
These people should play Hearts of Iron. Great game, but really really time intensive. Still it’s a fun game that really gets into the weeds.
@seththenewb:
@Cow:
Finns deserved a roundel.
Yes that is true but then people would want rounel for South africa, Romania, Hungary, Luxemburg… you know where that would go
These people should play Hearts of Iron. Great game, but really really time intensive. Still it’s a fun game that really gets into the weeds.
If you are playing hoi3 try ICE mod
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsPIzRsUtlE
'nuf said.
You can easily add Canada using HBG’s Canadian roundel tokens and either some painted British pieces or eventually HBG & FMG’s Canadian pieces. FMG even makes Canadian dice now too.
I’ve added Canada and played it that way (taking the 8 IPCs from UK) and it makes things a bit interesting sometimes. Play them right after the UK & SEAC/India in order.
wow allies are decentralized enough as it is to have canada lol.
@Cow:
wow allies are decentralized enough as it is to have canada lol.
In my house rules, all Commonwealth units may act in complete coordination (removing the decentralization except for industrial reasons). In my mind, that historically makes sense. German U-Boats made getting raw materials from Canada into the UK virtually impossible. Now Canada can produce DDs and transports and materiel slowly and move it over under escort and US assist once the US is active.
So would you just have Canada be a separate power, but they can choose to “give” their IPCs to London? If London falls they collect for territories in North America (and Brazil?) but can only mobilize in Quebec?
@Vance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsPIzRsUtlE
'nuf said.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but look at all that extra gear the US soldier’s wearing. I’m aware that adds to the weight that needs to be dragged, but trust me that stuff tires you out. At one point I was a combatives instructor in the army. I’m still in the NG and still have my certification, I just haven’t done combatives for years. I’ve had to do combatives with and without an IBA/full battle rattle. You have some much more body movement without that stuff on and it looks like the plates are in which further restricts freedom of movement. Plus, you really can get really gassed as it constricts your breathing. Which looks exactly like what happened to the US troop, he was holding his own and they were going back and forth till he ran out of energy. Don’t get me wrong, the IBA’s great in a firefight to take a bullet, it just can be very tiring to wear and do any physical activity.
OK but the Canadian guy won.
@Vance:
So would you just have Canada be a separate power, but they can choose to “give” their IPCs to London? If London falls they collect for territories in North America (and Brazil?) but can only mobilize in Quebec?
No Canada is completely a separate power - IPCs are not shared with London and if London falls, it means nothing for the Canadians (except they better load up on Vaseline)…LOL.
London’s IPCs are tied to only those in the west that it directly controls down to Rhodesia. South Africa is a 3 IPC Minor Ally in my game (IPCs are separate and production is separate - all gains go towards the UK however - SA is ALWAYS 3 IPCs).
Of course, SEAC (India, etc) is also completely separate.
The only thing that is tied together among all Commonwealth nations is that they MAY move together in unison (provided those same units were not moved on the same turn already). In other words, Canadian troops may board, and be moved by UK transports as long as they’ve not moved already on their own, and vice versa.
It’s pretty clean and it works well, AND I think it’s historically accurate (units of all the Commonwealth typically did work together - Canadians under UK & US command at Normandy, Australian-Royal navy joint task forces, etc).
My question is, why does Australia and New Zealand deserve to get their own power, India gets its own money, but Canada just gets a few roundels. That is messed up.
The Canadian IPCs having to be spent in North America would add a dose of realism to the game, probably one of the easy / most material change I can think about.
The IPC value is a bit low at 7, that should be increased to something like 10 to compensate (and why not an industrial complex on the Pacific coast to give option to go Pacific).
