• '10

    You want to give the Russians more money for being not at war with the Japanese?

    Don’t know, what is your production for Russia, but I buy tanks, artillery and infantry, maybe a plane in R1.

    …and the road to Moskau is very long.

    It’s hard enough for germany to figth the UK back in the nort sea and the mediterrane sea, without spending too much money. One of the biggest german problems is, to get air support to the eastern front.

    How do you want to outnumber Russia with an IPC income of 40?

    Russia should not be allowed to attack anyone till R4.


  • An important part of my National Objective suggestion is that the power who didnt break the pact STILL gets those IPCs

    So USSR is at 40 at the end of their first turn….not much more than the normal 37…

    The actual rule would read

    The Russo-Japanese Non-Agression pact is a National Objective for both Japan and the Soviet Union. While bound to the pact each power collects 3 IPCs.

    • Japan is considered to break the pact if it:
      a) Attacks original Soviet Territory

    • The Soviet Union is considered to break the pact if it:
      a) Attacks original Japanese Territory
      b) Attacks/Occupies Chinese Territory

    Powers still collect their 3 IPCs even if the other power has broken the pact.
    You may never collect the National Objective after you have broken the pact.


  • @oztea:

    An important part of my National Objective suggestion is that the power who didnt break the pact STILL gets those IPCs

    So USSR is at 40 at the end of their first turn….not much more than the normal 37…

    The actual rule would read

    The Russo-Japanese Non-Agression pact is a National Objective for both Japan and the Soviet Union. While bound to the pact each power collects 3 IPCs.

    • Japan is considered to break the pact if it:
      a) Attacks original Soviet Territory

    • The Soviet Union is considered to break the pact if it:
      a) Attacks original Japanese Territory
      b) Attacks/Occupies Chinese Territory

    Powers still collect their 3 IPCs even if the other power has broken the pact.
    You may never collect the National Objective after you have broken the pact.

    Sounds not bad.
    And yes the “receive IPC’s until break the pact” line is necessary, since 3 IPC’s wouldn’t matter for Japan, (as it can get that from taking Amur, Siberia and Soviet Far East - taking those IPC’s away from Russia). (edit: but i see now that deadbunny already said the same)

    So Russia would be allowed to fight back on it’s own territory, right?


  • @oztea:

    The Russo-Japanese Non-Agression pact is a National Objective for both Japan and the Soviet Union. While bound to the pact each power collects 3 IPCs.

    • Japan is considered to break the pact if it:
      a) Attacks original Soviet Territory

    • The Soviet Union is considered to break the pact if it:
      a) Attacks original Japanese Territory
      b) Attacks/Occupies Chinese Territory

    Powers still collect their 3 IPCs even if the other power has broken the pact.
    You may never collect the National Objective after you have broken the pact.

    Thanks very much for this.  I like it better than mine.  The kind of discussion that has taken place has been very helpful and constructive.  This may make Russians even stronger, but I am not sure it is decisive.  Another house rule that I like is the one that gives German submarines three IPCs of convoy damage which doesn’t exactly balance this but couldn’t hurt in conjunction.


  • Global 40 is not a bean count of IPCs like the other games were.
    One extra infantry a turn for USSR will not make or break a game.

    The Incentive the 3 IPCs carries however is powerful.

    You rarely see a player willingy choose to violate the conditions of one of his own National Objectives……so there is a sense of protection there.

    Also…would you sacrifice your NO, knowing that that has little effect on the other pact member…they still collect theirs.


  • @calvinhobbesliker:

    Well, if Japan invaded Siberia, Stalin already has a 2 front war, so I bet he’d save the capital rather than snowy siberia

    You live in Canada right? Well imagine what would happen to morale if Japan and Germany invaded BC and Quebec, respectively? Would you be pissed if your government decided to let BC go in order to protect the more populated area?

    It is not just economy and capital that matters, there are other factors that don’t come into play with the board game. You know that America was actually invaded during WWII right? The Aleutian islands were attacked by the Japanese, and I guarantee you that Roosevelt didn’t say, “Guess that sucks for Alaska.” Most people don’t even know about that, because we like to boast that we have never been attacked since the war of 1812 on our home soil.


  • Alaska wasn’t a state until 1958.  So TECHNICALLY…


  • @maverick_76:

    @calvinhobbesliker:

    Well, if Japan invaded Siberia, Stalin already has a 2 front war, so I bet he’d save the capital rather than snowy siberia

    You live in Canada right? Well imagine what would happen to morale if Japan and Germany invaded BC and Quebec, respectively? Would you be pissed if your government decided to let BC go in order to protect the more populated area?

    It is not just economy and capital that matters, there are other factors that don’t come into play with the board game. You know that America was actually invaded during WWII right? The Aleutian islands were attacked by the Japanese, and I guarantee you that Roosevelt didn’t say, “Guess that sucks for Alaska.” Most people don’t even know about that, because we like to boast that we have never been attacked since the war of 1812 on our home soil.

    I actually live in California. However, if I did live in BC, I would understand if the only troops were sent to defend Quebec.

    As for the Aleutians, they weren’t reinvaded for an entire year.


  • Question:  If Russia is NOT at war with Japan, can America or any other allies move through Russian territories and or camp in them?

  • '10

    From ILs 1939 game rules.    NON-AGGRESSION PACT: The Soviet Union and Japan have a special treaty in place. The Soviet player can never attack Japanese territories until Berlin falls. The Japanese player can attack the Soviets as early as turn 4.


  • russia cant attack japan before berlin falls,this is historic
    japan cant attack russia till it holds all of china


  • I think ozeta has posted the best solution for this sticky situation I have ever seen. Unfortunatly it is near impossible of a board game to model the massive size of the Soviet Union, or the fact that Japanese logistics wouldnt have been able to support a thrust much past irtkurst.
    I think Stalin would have pulled those siberian troops even once Moscow was threatened, without a doubt. However, this dosnt mean that the Soviets Far east was undefneded. The Local commander, Gen.Apanisenko, managed to build a force of nearly 1 million men AFTER, the siberian reserves had been sent west.
    I think the forces we see in the far east in the begining of the game more closely represent these troops rather then those of the Siberian eliets that counter-attacked in front of Moscow in the winter of 41-42. The troops that were pulled out had atry support and tank batalions with them, so they had real offensive power.


  • @Fishmoto37:

    From ILs 1939 game rules.    NON-AGGRESSION PACT: The Soviet Union and Japan have a special treaty in place. The Soviet player can never attack Japanese territories until Berlin falls. The Japanese player can attack the Soviets as early as turn 4.

    So Russia can’t attack back? That is retarded.


  • I think IL meant originally Japanese territories untill turn 4.

    However it should read

    The USSR may not attack original Japanese Territory, or attempt to liberate occupied Chinese territory untill after its fourth turn


  • @oztea:

    I think IL meant originally Japanese territories untill turn 4.

    However it should read

    The USSR may not attack original Japanese Territory, or attempt to liberate occupied Chinese territory untill after its fourth turn

    It should also read unless they are attacked still. USSR should be allowed to do more then just reclaim its territory. IMO its a stupid rule.


  • most Canadiens I know would GLADLY let Quebec fall to protect any other provence.  :roll:


  • Why not simply add Japan to Italy and Germany in the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact?

    Russia is unable to declare war on Japan until turn 4 unless war has been declared on it by an Axis power. Japan may declare war on Russia whenever it likes but Russia may then go to war against the entire Axis, causing Germany to lose its 5 ipc bonus on the next turn.


  • @larrymarx:

    Why not simply add Japan to Italy and Germany in the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact?

    Russia is unable to declare war on Japan until turn 4 unless war has been declared on it by an Axis power. Japan may declare war on Russia whenever it likes but Russia may then go to war against the entire Axis, causing Germany to lose its 5 ipc bonus on the next turn.

    Well, cause that didn’t happen.

    However, Russia and Japan did have sign a ceasefire agreement after Khalkhin Gol that eventually led to the pact in 41.  It doesn’t exactly follow that Russia is so free to attack Japan as historically it wasn’t in their best interest to do so, and it was Japan that was expansionist in East Asia; not nearly the case with Russia.  I’d prefer a solution were russia is required abide the cease fire regardless of war in europe , but allow Japan to break it whenever they please (which still doesn’t cause war with the other axis powers).  Russia just has to make sure it will be costly for Japan, which is precisely what they did with the far east forces.


  • @kcdzim:

    I’d prefer a solution were russia is required abide the cease fire regardless of war in europe , but allow Japan to break it whenever they please (which still doesn’t cause war with the other axis powers).  Russia just has to make sure it will be costly for Japan, which is precisely what they did with the far east forces.

    How about doing this but also allowing Russia to break the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact if Japan chooses to attack early?


  • i would prefer a garrison requirement as was the case in A World at War but honestly any rule would be better then the current nothing

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

25

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts