the debate was never settled. i said why i didn’t think it should be liberty ships are no one rebuted. i never thought US DD’s were on the table, it was Essex CVs (cheap because rushed into production and fast) that I thought had the lead spot.
What would be neat is if you can arrange it so that all the war crimes result in IPC gains but have morality point losses. If at some point those war crimes result in tangible bad things happening to you (e.g. Fifth column etc), then you have to balance the benefits against the potential harms and it really becomes a game of “How much can I get away with?”.
That non-aggro pact looks a little familiar.
But it should add this: the 2 signatories cannot allow their allies to attack the other signatory from their territory.
That is, for example, UK bombers based on Russian soil cannot attack Japanese units, nor land in Russia from such an attack from elsewhere.
The treaty should remain in force for as long as the power gaining the right to attack wishes. For example if Berlin falls Russia and Japan are only at war when Russia declares war on Japan, which it can do at any time. Japan would not have the right to attack until Russia declared war, or until it’s own criteria were achieved.
(Supposing Russia wanted to see a powerful Italy beated down a bit, or rebuild it’s own forces up after a hard German campaign, before risking war with a bloated Japanese monster.)
For me, it’s getting more historical accurate play of nations in WWII that actually fought. I find it very strange that Vichy France and Co-Belligerent Italy isn’t in the game, obviously it is hard to do this.