we played a game the other week that you could move your capital when captured (not for victory conditions, just for building and production) to any territory you had an IC on, Major if you had it, or choice of minor otherwise. While it certainly added a different aspect of allowing you to continue to build, it resulted in nations never being defeated.
If you have the AA guns around do you have the white complexes from one of the old games?
I use the complexes & AA Guns from old games. I much prefer that over the silly little squares that are so hard to pick up.
A lot of posters seemed stunned at this scenario, never scene it ever happen or even could happen. Now that I mulled it over last night and looked at the rules and so forth it is very obvious to me why no one has ever scene this scenario. Because the scenario makes no logical sense.
Italy DOW on Russia and moves in 2 tanks into Eastern Poland.
Russia is now at war with Italy and can DOW on Germany at the start of their next turn, turn 3.
Germany on Turn 3 does not DOW on Russia and just non combats into Eastern Poland.
Russia at the start of Turn 3 DOW on Germany and off we go.
There is no logical reason why Russia would not DOW on Germany at the start of Turn 3, none.
Heck you could argue that it makes no logical sense that Germany did not DOW on Russia at the start of G3 since Italy brought Russia into the war and Russia WILL DOW on Germany on R3.
From my perspective, if I was planning on doing a G3 Barbarossa AND I wanted to drive towards the south, then yes, it makes sense to not DOW. My stack will be together except for the minimum required mobile units and maybe 1 AAA in Poland so Russia doesn’t attack Poland to get their NO for occupying an Axis territory. But E. Poland will be real strong because the German air will be there and maybe bombers will also be in range of a raid on the Moscow factory. Also, 5 IPCs is more income than I’d probably get as Germany on the 1st turn.
There are a few disadvantages of course. 1, Russian blockers can’t be attacked. 2, the Scandinavian units are behind. But for me that’s ok, I just use them to lay siege anyways. I never expect to get Moscow on turn 6 anymore. I assume that the UK/Anzac and that lone French fighter are going to get to Moscow.Â
The important thing to understand about mechanized infantry movement is that they move in exactly the same way that tanks do, except that they can’t blitz without a tank. In most cases, the confusion on this issue comes from the definition of the term “blitz”.
Many people define “blitz” as any two-space movement by a tank, but that’s incorrect. A blitz movement is a combat movement through an unoccupied, enemy-controlled territory and into another territory. Only the first territory is “blitzed”. The second one is not, regardless of its status.
So, mechanized infantry may only make a combat movement through an unoccupied, enemy-controlled territory and into another territory when paired with a tank. Any other two-space movement that a tank can legally make can also be made by a mechanized infantry without an accompanying tank. This means that mechanized infantry may always move two friendly spaces alone in noncombat movement, and they may also move two spaces alone in combat movement if the first territory is friendly.
Yeah, I wish they put the couple of rules not in both books in the global section at the back.
Europe has the straits rule.
Pacific has Kamikaze and China rules.
If you’re aware of that, it isn’t too much of a problem.
i actually usually point out misstakes in my opponents moves. That way I can be certain that I win because of better strategy, not better tactics.
very difficult to suprise someone if you tell them that they are exposing themselves to certain moves.