In fact, it could even be argued that Germany should collect the IPCs for these Vichy French territories after capturing Paris. … but that might be going a bridge too far.
While I agree with this in spirit, I do think it could be taken too far. You could have people that say it should be this way for all countries: Once the capital is captured, the capturing power now controls all the territories and units of the vanquished nation.
For one thing, this would eliminate any possibility of liberation and I think this game would end up being a sort of Deluxe Risk rather than Axis & Allies.
Imagine this scenario: Germany goes after Russia and tries punching straight through to Moscow along the north route, thereby NOT taking Ukraine or Stalingrad. Suppose Japan didn’t attack Russia at all in the far east. Now suppose Russia was foolish and bought a battleship for the Caspian Sea instead of infantry so they didn’t have a proper defense in Moscow and Germany wins. Now Germany controls territory all the way to the Pacific and Japan now has a buddy to their north instead of an enemy. Plus, Germany becomes instantly rich, almost doubling their income with all the Russian 2 point territories plus all the troops that were guarding those territories (not to mention Germany’s shiny new battleship in the Caspian Sea.).
I wonder if a crazy rule like this would make games longer or shorter? Capital defense would probably be even heavier.
Yes, Carriers and aircraft move independently, but the rulebook just states, that warships may not move …! It states nowhere, that aircraft can’t move to any seazone. They are not allowed to land on any allied terretorry or aircraftcarrier, but they can of course fly ther and if there is a legal landing spot, land there. The planes are not restricted to not move into the atlantic, they (in most cases) can’t land and therefore can’t stay there.
The Japanese advance through Russia is annoying, but it very much opens the door to shut Japan down and stall the Japanese advance.
You’ve got two options. The first of which is to sink the Japanese fleet and take control of SZ6 to prevent Japan from ferrying over units to the mainland while convoying Japan’s eventual income to zero and stopping the flood into Russia. You can trade your ships for Japanese ships early, sacrificing carriers by absorbing two hits to allow your aircraft to continue to sink ships in SZ6 (which of course means their demise too). Once the fleet is crippled, Japan is going to be stuck putting out a DD or CR at best each round in SZ6 - easily sunk by US DD/SS. By Japan ignoring income and making a bee line to Moscow, its most likely going to lose the fight in China as I’d expect India to DOW and stack up the Burma Road to get Chinese artillery out, nullifying the Japanese advantage over China. Losing Chinese income, the DEI income and getting convoyed, Japan’s going to be making less than 10 IPC/round once the US DOW occurs.
The other option is to ignore Japan and just build the US to land on Gib on Round 4 and then onto Norway/Italy/the French Minors on Round 5. A reinforcement of British units- a combination of infantry and aircraft can help prevent a German counter for the US landing. The only hope is that you put enough of a threat on Germany that it has to reverse its economic spending getting units into the fight for Moscow so that Berlin has to be defended instead of a factory of Mech supporting what I’d expect to be Armor purchases that were made earlier. India can also then ignore China and start churning out Armor/Mech and start marching toward Egypt/Afghan/Southern Russia. Japan will not be able to hold territories near Moscow for long with India spending from India1 forward on a march in that direction. Particularly as India claims all the DEI to pump its income into the 30’s. I’d let Anzac just build SS every round and continue to convoy/harass Japanese territories to further compound Japan’s problem of spending to get units towards Moscow whilst being harassed via convoy everywhere.
Basically the Japanese making the Moscow Rush equates to a boring Pacific Theater and UK, India, US all converging on Europe. Italy can easily be convoyed out of the game with a combination of SS purchases out of S.Africa, India and UK. Japan has an 8 roundish march to Moscow (unless theres a suicide aircraft punch). Germany is 7ish rounds out itself. If rounds 5, 6 and 7 equate to Allied landings in Europe, Germany has a tough decision to face with a convoy’ed Italy, an over-extended Japan and a split economy defending Europe and advancing on Moscow.
Realize you still may lose Moscow, but with the Allies entrenched in Europe with a full economic investment, India may be able to reclaim Moscow for the Russians as Germany has to reverse course instead of swinging south towards Egypt for the win.
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.