UK starts w/4 IC's in the global game (2 of them are capitals)


  • @Brain:

    @TitusAndronicus:

    Assuming there are Seaports in Egypt and South Africa it wont be too difficult to funnel in a couple extra troops into India from the South Africa IC.  Japan will be far too preoccupied wreaking havoc in Pacific and dealing with the US to really disrupt UK transports with small escorts in the Indian Ocean.  Nothing is stopping the UK from using their Europe income on units that will be eventually be moved to India.

    With so much at stake, they will have to. This will make life easier for Germany.

    I see a lot of cooperation w/India & S. Africa. I also see more cooperation between Italy and Japan (rare) to control the Indian ocean. Either of these IC’s in axis hands would be a real problem for the allies. If one falls the other could be next using the same routes (NB). N Africa/Mid East will definitely play a huge roll, and don’t forget about the feisty Anzac. The Indian ocean will see a lot more action.

    Its true that Jap will have its hands full w/US, but that could be as late as rd #4, if Jap can bait the UK. I wonder if a J1 attack will be as good an option in the Global game. They will have more UK units to deal with coming over from Africa, so India may stand tall. That and the US steaming in along with Russian aid to China could be overwhelming.


  • Keep in mind this is the 1940 scenario, the Royal Navy still has the HMS Hood and Ark Royal which could very well be reflected as an extra full AC and battleship (or cruiser) in the Atlantic, especially considering the Battleship outside Malaya in P40 probably represents the Prince of Wales.  Couple that with the near-certain UK naval base in Gibraltar, the French Navy and Fortress Malta with a scramble (last two confirmed by LH IIRC) it may not be particularly easy for Italian and German ships to sail around where ever they please.


  • If Indian money has to be spent in india does that mean

    All Brittish income from the Asian board has to be spend in India (including any captures of the DEIs)
    All income from the Asian conteniant (Hong Kong, Mayala)+the income from the DEIs can be spent anywhere.
    Just income from the subconteninat (India, Burma).

    Will Indian NOs go to London either


  • @SilverAngelSurfer:

    If the Italians focus on taking the Middle East to get their NOs and open the door into Africa and the underbelly of Russia, they won’t have much else for dealing with Gibraltar or supporting Germany in Europe.  And if the Japanese move the IJN toward the East Coast of Africa, they open themselves up to the US/ANZAC further east in the Pacific.  We’ll have to see how it actually plays out considering the way Japan is playing out in the Pacific game right now, but I think the S. Africa/India combo in Global is going to be a tougher nut to crack than it first appears.

    There will be no ANZAC money if India falls.


  • @democratic:

    If Indian money has to be spent in india does that mean

    All Brittish income from the Asian board has to be spend in India (including any captures of the DEIs)
    All income from the Asian conteniant (Hong Kong, Mayala)+the income from the DEIs can be spent anywhere.
    Just income from the subconteninat (India, Burma).

    Will Indian NOs go to London either

    Its the first one:All Brittish income from the Pacific board has to be spend in India (including any captures of the DEIs)

    From what Larry said the Pac side won’t have any UK NO’s (DEI) in global, but the income generated by DEI held by UK will go to India.


  • And if I read that right, ANZAC will not even collect IPC’s if India falls.


  • Yes, I’m sure Sydney and Melborne would just all stop producing war goods just becasue India fell.

    I hope ANZAC are indepandant of anyone else, because Brittan did nothing for us, and the only ones who helped us was the US, in return for use of our ports and army.

    Transfering money from Aus to Londen would be almost impossible, and so inefficant by the time it gets to the Atlantic there is nothing for the Germans to sink.

  • Official Q&A

    ANZAC will still be an independent power.


  • I wonder if Japan will still want to make J1 attack now, especially if it triggers USA to 100 economy! (Maybe it will be +40 NO each side depending against whom he is at war)


  • Those are good questions,

    1. Is it possible for the US to be at war with Jap, and not Euro axis, and vise versa in the gl game?
    2. Does US also get a $40 NO bonus (more or less) in the Euro game, and if so does it get both bonuses in the global game (or are they reduced).

  • @WILD:

    Those are good questions,

    1. Is it possible for the US to be at war with Jap, and not Euro axis, and vise versa in the gl game?

    Apparently USSR can be at war with Germany/Italy and not with Japan according to LH, so there is a precedent, but I’m not sure that will be the same with the US… :?


  • @SilverAngelSurfer:

    @WILD:

    Those are good questions,

    1. Is it possible for the US to be at war with Jap, and not Euro axis, and vise versa in the gl game?

    Apparently USSR can be at war with Germany/Italy and not with Japan according to LH, so there is a precedent, but I’m not sure that will be the same with the US… :?

    If they keep to historic accuracy regarding the diplomatic relations within the Axis, probably not.  The Tripartite Pact specified that should anyone not already involved in the war (with the specific exception of the USSR) declare war on one of the Axis powers, all axis powers were obligated to declare war in response.  If this is implied in the diplomatic rules, once US declares war on Japan, Germany will likely also be at war with the US.  At that point, the US can always opt NOT to declare war on Germany(but it makes no sense in the game unless you hate the people you’re playing with).

    So  it might be possible depending on the rules, but I wouldn’t call that example of the USSR as a precedent.


  • This rule is the first rule i’ve seen that could force allied shipping to be viable if not nessescary. South Africa, ANZAC, and the US need to gain a shipping lane throught the indian and pacifiic oceans. US transports through the south pacific

    The British Send South Africa troops-1-2 turns
    Anzac sends infantry on American transports-2 turns
    US sends tanks to india, dropping off infantry in Queensland-3 to Queensland, five to india

    Costs
    US-3-5 transports+protection
    British-1-2 transports+protection
    ANZAC-Extra protection for US transports (Hop on American transports)


  • @SilverAngelSurfer:

    @WILD:

    Those are good questions,

    1. Is it possible for the US to be at war with Jap, and not Euro axis, and vise versa in the gl game?

    Apparently USSR can be at war with Germany/Italy and not with Japan according to LH, so there is a precedent, but I’m not sure that will be the same with the US… :?

    I don’t think that Russia will be treated the same as the Western Allies.


  • @Brain:

    @SilverAngelSurfer:

    @WILD:

    Those are good questions,

    1. Is it possible for the US to be at war with Jap, and not Euro axis, and vise versa in the gl game?

    Apparently USSR can be at war with Germany/Italy and not with Japan according to LH, so there is a precedent, but I’m not sure that will be the same with the US… :?

    I don’t think that Russia will be treated the same as the Western Allies.

    I doubt they will either, due to the way it was historically and also for simplicity’s sake.  I think the Russian exception is simply to represent the Russia-Japan Non-aggression agreement.  I wonder if there will be any kind of NO between Russia and Japan that further reflects this; something that might be similar to the German-Russian trade NO that has already been revealed?


  • @SilverAngelSurfer:

    I doubt they will either, due to the way it was historically and also for simplicity’s sake.  I think the Russian exception is simply to represent the Russia-Japan Non-aggression agreement.  I wonder if there will be any kind of NO between Russia and Japan that further reflects this; something that might be similar to the German-Russian trade NO that has already been revealed?

    I would think that there will be a NO, but I can’t imagine what it would be.


  • Perhaps that both the Russians and Japanese get 5 IPCs for every turn they aren’t at war?


  • @SilverAngelSurfer:

    Perhaps that both the Russians and Japanese get 5 IPCs for every turn they aren’t at war?

    Ah that’s it, they both benefit. How come I couldn’t come up with that.


  • @SilverAngelSurfer:

    Perhaps that both the Russians and Japanese get 5 IPCs for every turn they aren’t at war?

    What would be the historical basis however?

    Saved resources on the count that both parties are not at war, or are you alluding to trading between the Soviets and Japanese via railways in Manchuria that connected to the Trans-Siberian Railway?


  • I wasn’t assuming any historical basis, just gameplay basis.  I guess the only historical basis might be saved resources from not fighting each other, but that probably doesn’t justify an NO.

    I have been thinking though that more of the Siberian territories should probably be worth 0 IPCs for income purposes rather than 1 IPC like they have been, because I can’t see how those regions produced more than places like Yukon, Greenland, Iceland, or some of the 0 IPC islands…  It would better reflect Japan’s unwillingness to go through Siberia because it wouldn’t gain them anything regardless…

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

29

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts