Who's for a forum game? No bid, normal luck, Spring 1942, no optional rules?

The “chunk of land” in question has no name, and is therefore not a game space.  If it were connected to United Kingdom (which it isn’t), the rules for islands wouldn’t apply, as United Kingdom would not then be “a single territory surrounded entirely by one or more sea zones” (Eire would keep it from being so).  In any case, it’s a moot point, as neutral territories may not be entered in this game, and there are no sea zones that touch the unnamed land mass that don’t also touch United Kingdom.

In 1940, the same land mass is connected to Scotland by virtue of the UK emblem straddling (and obscuring) the sea between them, as CWO Marc pointed out.  In this case, land units can move between Eire and Scotland without the use of transports, and it is relevant, as neutral territories are not off-limits in that game.

Hope this helps.

When I play with my friends, we do what you propose; we count the IPC value of a country at the end of its turn.  We find this to be simple because we simply count the IPC difference for each territory, and add this (or subtract) from the default IPC for this nation.

We find that when we adjust the tokens for all countries, that this is a very error prone method, and it forces us to do counting that is not necessary.  All that is necessary is to know how much your nation is worth at the end of your turn.  At all other times this information is useless.

But, you should still use paper money, because you collect money at the end of your turn, and you may also have saved some money from your previous turn phase.  The amount of money that you have in pocket is generally not the same as your IPC value at any given moment in the game.

For the rule To see the differences between the Revised, LHTR and Spring 1942 check the attached .pdf, made by Krieghund.

Map & setup changes:

UK Battleship on SZ13 replaced with a Cruiser UK Destroyer on SZ35 replaced with a Cruiser US Destroyer on SZ10 replaced with a Cruiser J Destroyer on SZ50 replaced with a Cruiser Formosa (J) and Iceland (UK) have been added to the map Western Canada now only borders SZ64 (on Revised it bordered Central US, SZs63 & 55) Central US now borders Eastern Canada and Panama instead of W. Canada and Mexico

Can one of the moderators please make this a sticky topic?
A&A_1942_&_Revised_Editions_Rules_Comparison.pdf

Right.  Just to clarify, your destroyers and combined fleet can happily sail right past enemy subs and transports.  You need to spend 8 IPC on a destroyer to use it as a speed bump.  Even then, you can destroy the blocking destroyer with air and a sub maybe, then non-combat move past that contested sea-zone leaving behind only the sub and the attacking air units non-combat move to where the fleet will end up.  It gets even harder to slow down a multi-national fleet, your ally clears the blocker then you can move 2 spaces and do combat before a new blocker can be placed, unless the defender was also multi-national….

Building AC + 2 destroyers in SZ8 landing 2 US fighters and adding the US cruiser is usually a nice option if Germany attacked SZ2 and killed the battleship (if not, just building what you would need to survive an air+sub attack and build transports if you have money left. Depending on the German odds of attack on SZ8 you bring or not the US transports, and you may sent the UK transports on Washington’s coast not to lose extra units without reason against likely German attack.  Even if Germany as better odds to win on SZ8 (depending on how many planes survived/were built), this strat is nice to lure Germany forces away from Russia and you should always be willing early to trade more UK IPC for a bit less Germany IPC (their “real” value is not the same since Russia/Germany front is ALWAYS the most important front). Also, if Germany had a very good turn 1 and kept all planes, you should be willing to take some risks to try to take the advantage out of axis’ hands.

Also it depends on how Germany places is units, if all planes are in Paris, you can build in SZ2 for exemple.

Fighter escorts yes, Dardanelles no. Fighter escorts makes bombing campaigns more challenging than simply building fleets of bombers and sending them.

Regarding the Dardanelles rule it limits the options for nearly all powers in the Med:

Germany’s Med fleet is reduced to striking Africa. It can’t help pressuring the Russians on Caucasus or dealing with any incursions on Ukraine. Russia R1 tactic of building a submarine to sink the German fleet is removed (the only time on the entire series of games where the Russians can build ships!) The US cannot set a transport chain to reinforce Caucasus (rather a waste of resources but I’ve seen enough people trying it). Japan can’t threaten Caucasus with amphibious landings (which usually makes pressure on the Allies to close the Suez)

Since the game is considered already balanced by most players I disagree that having the rule goes towards balancing it, since I can’t see 1 side getting a big advantage by having it closed.

The main argument thus to use the rule is the historical situation but the game does not intend to fully reproduce History, I so guess it is mostly a matter of taste regarding playability/historical accuracy.

@manincellv:

It is not worth getting without Italy.  Italy has set the standard now.  Its not a real A&A game without it.

Yes. Italy is awesome.