Quick question

@warrafael:

I have two quick questions regarding UK and Germany NOs

Germany

5 IPCs per territory if Germany controls Novgorod (Leningrad), Volgograd (Stalongrad) and/or Russia (Moscow).

It may sound silly but I want to make sure that I have understood it correctly.
Does it mean that from the time Germany gets i.e. Novgorod, it get 5 IPCs as bonus income ?
Or will Germany receive 15 IPCs all at once in each turn iwhen conquers and holds all three areas ?

United Kingdom

5 IPCs if the United Kingdom controls all of its original territories in its European economy

If Germany conquers Iceland or Chipre for instance, does the UK lose this bonus income ?

German NO: 5 for one territory, 10 for two, 15 for three territories.

UK NO: Correct!

HTH :-)

A kamikaze strike can target any specific
enemy surface warship (not a submarine or transport)
belonging to the attacking power.

Page 16 of Pacific 1940 2nd Edition rulebook.

@WILD:

I think that if the the allies were allowed to just NCM in to take control of a fallen allied powers tt’s (collect the income) it would swing to much income to the allies and break the game. Plus if your getting paid for all those tt’s why would you Liberate your former allies capital (kinda like how Paris is now). It is better to leave things as they are and they only get paid if they liberate them from the enemy. That makes a pretty good cat & mouse game of how much tt the axis want to take vs how many of them they will be able to hold later on.

Â

If that were the case, then I feel the Axis original TTs should be worth double to Axis powers only.  Sort of like the Russian NO, but reversed.  But yes, I concur with your analysis, in-so-much in regard to Dutch/Netherlands.

I always viewed that rule as a way to not automatically give the income to England but not deny it to Japan either.  It really only plays in the Pacific campaign, as your only chance to get the income is to invest enough to push Japan out (otherwise, Japan will crush any resistance and take it.)

Zallomallo is right.  Because the sub submerged, it no longer blocks the amphibious assault and cannot kill the transport.  There was no reason for the sub to submerge, however, as the planes could no longer hit it.  If the sub did not submerge, the transport could retreat, assuming it had somewhere to retreat to (if not, it would be lost).

No, they can also be used in regular sea battles.

Depends whether the dardenelles is opened or closed but In other areas it could happen I.E. med

Gibraltar is the only exception.

Plus Germany has a little extra incentive to make sure they keep it with the new NO.  Taking Norway and building an IC there won’t be the sure thing it’s always been up to now, but yes, if the US can pull it off it would be a major shift in power.