yukon and bc were combined into western canada.
Good research Marc.
I think giving CR/DD would be just right. (Not sure off which Island I would put them.) Adding Inf to the islands would make them too difficult to capture. Remember Japan starts with just 3 TTs. Japan starts with too much Air, so having to destroy another 2 ships would compensate somewhat.
Something to think about is if the Allies decide to stack on Java.
If you let the DEI player stack 1 DD, 1 CR, and 2 Inf on Java, Japan would observe the following:
1 BB (UK)
3 CR (UK/ANZAC/DEI)
3 DD (UK/ANZAC/DEI)
2 TT (UK/ANZAC)
2 Ftr (ANZAC)
6 Inf (UK/ANZAC/DEI)
Thats a bit of a dilemma for Japan to consider a DOW on that stack and having to fully commit at least 5, maybe 6 loaded TT to simply take the DEI stronghold.
This is why I think I’d suggest not allowing stacking of DEI units in one place.
My revision would be to give the Allies 4 Dutch units (use the French units for it). 2 Inf, 1 DD, 1 CR.
You can place one unit at each SZ/Territory of your choosing on the DEI to include Borneo.
They are restricted to their starting location until a DOW by Japan and defend with allied units against axis attacks.
They are considered neutral until a Japanese DOW.
They move on the French turn.
Yes, that’s a good point about stacking you both made. The 1 cruiser + 1 destroyer + 2 dispersed infantry approach does indeed sound like the best option.
That is sounding pretty good. I was thinking any Dutch units would not move but basically just be there for defense, similar to the standing armies on neutral territories. As for the naval units, I think having them remain in place until a Japanese DOW is probably okay. A couple of extra Allied ships wouldn’t be too overpowering but still make Japan commit resources.
If we only give the Dutch 2 infantry, I would say one on Sumatra and one on Java with Celebes remaining open. Actually, I always thought there should be a UK infantry on Borneo at setup. I know the British presence out there was pretty weak in 1940, but having a 4 IPC territory with no defense at all just doesn’t seem right to me.
As for stacking, I don’t think the Dutch infantry should be allowed to move from whichever island they start at. They are there to defend that particular island and that is that.
Here is a question: If the UK or ANZAC move land troops to one of the Dutch islands to get the IPCs from them, do the Dutch infantry change to UK or ANZAC? Or do they remain Dutch?
I’d probably simply leave them as Dutch (considering the area was under Dutch Command anyways).
Otherwise you might as well just change the DEI on the board map to Pro-Allied territories like other neutrals?
Yes, I’d let them remain Dutch too. One of the points of this house rule idea is to give the Dutch their own units, to rectify their rather odd status of having their own map roundel but no actual combat forces – so if the Dutch units were converted into plain old UK or ANZAC units when one of those countries lands in the DEI, it would spoil the fun. And from a historical point of view, it’s likewise accurate to keep them Dutch: the Dutch components of ABDACOM remained Dutch during the DEI campaign, even though they were part of a coalition.
I also agree that the Dutch infantry units should gallantly fight and die where they stand. As Marshall Mac Mahon famously said at Sevastopol in 1855, “Jâ€y suis, jâ€y reste!” – here I am and here I will stay.