Malaya is too vulnerable, and it takes too long to secure. HK is far stronger for your later-game strategic defense (free NB), hidden square)
The opposite is the case for Malaya. Yes, it is vulnerable but strategically Malaya is the by far most powerful IC Japan can place.
I think you’re taking FIC as a given there. I can’t see how the Malaya IC is more powerful than FIC. Doesn’t need a naval base built to reach Calcutta?
Thank you gentlemen… it is as I thought then.
They were not intentionally cheating, I am sure, however, they are still breaking the rules and will have to be penalized accordingly. Which probably means returning their ships to the proper sea zones, removing the infantry and surrendering whatever collected money they had to the bank.
I stand corrected. However, they (USSR) could declare war upon Japan and then attack a neutral such as Turkey, right?
No again, sorry:
Due to its separate treaties with Germany and Japan, the Soviet Union is in a unique position in its relationship with the
Axis powers. As a result, if the Soviet Union is at war with Axis powers on only one map, it is still under the restrictions
of being a neutral power (see “Powers Not at War with One Another,” page 15) on the other map, and Axis powers on
the other map are also still under those restrictions regarding the Soviet Union on both maps. For example, a state of
war with only Japan lifts the neutrality restrictions from the Soviet Union on the Pacific map only, and allows Japanese
units to attack or fly over Soviet-controlled territories on either map. However, the Soviet Union is still restricted on
the Europe map, …
I’ve tried this cheesy move two or three times, and barring the best possible situation (Japan has 4 unloaded transports you can deny them, and they DOW next round anyway to get the Philippines), it’s more a hindrance than a help to the Allies. I don’t think I’ll be using it in the future.