[quoteIts to give players a chance to start with a few new pieces rather than artifically add units to the existing setup and hence ruin the strategy. Now a player can essentually use the strategy he was using before and the volume of ideas that have been created for the game would not be rendered a waste. I do also understand that the new rules will have an impact on strategy. The funds that i propose are in no way a huge deal… perhaps a fund of 12-15 IPC to be spent on these units. enough for a starter force.
[quote]
Well that woud be FORCING the players to buy the new optional units then. (and that wouldn’t be realistic would it)
And if you don’t force the IPC to be spent on optional units then its just a generic “more IPC”.
But I see what you are getting at. You are trying to preserve (to some extent) opening strategys.
I just feel weird about it.
Italy is not empty. Look at the set up. Southern italy=italy and has 2 inf,1 art,1 tank,and a bb and Ap off shore. The italian army also has 2 inf ,1 tank,1 fighter in the balkans and 1 inf and 1 tank in lybia. Is that not enough of an Italian army?
Oh I see. Italy is new player so it doesn’t have that problem. You actually specified it.
So its “Southern Europe” thats empty. But I guess you meant for that.
But we haven’t solved he generic problem with non-new players.
Norway/Finland. Vichy France/Western Europe. Western/Eastern Australia.
I reckon we should just specific the split in the rules.
Norway: 2 INF
Finalnd: 1 INF
Vichy France: 1 INF
Western Europe: the rest
Western Australia: 1 INF
Eastern Australia: the rest
I see in your phase 3 map with setup ghosts…Finland, Vichy France, Western Australia is empty.
USSR can take Finland straight away.
Japan can take Western Australia straight away.
Is that your intension?
(It doesn’t quite preserve strategys. But that doesn’t matters.)