• @david-06 so your drop your argument ?

  • 2021 2020 '19 '18 '17

    @David-06 I guess the point I tried to make earlier was that I don’t necessarily think anything should change regarding this portion of the game concerning Mongolia. I get that this wasn’t historically plausible. But neither was an Allied attack of Belgium or the Netherlands, right? So should we take out the Allied ability in the game to attack them? The Republicans lost the SCW, should there even be a possibility of them winning by playing it out? To me, all historical reality is changed once the game starts, and it’s okay if things happen that probably never had a chance to in real life! I guess I think it’s okay that things happen in game that wouldn’t have historically speaking!

    But I’d also agree with @TheVeteran that I wouldn’t make that trade off for VP’s either. Getting two VP’s for those territories is probably far more worth the 2 IPP’s you might get a turn!

    @TheVeteran So interesting that our games don’t usually take Mongolia so early! I get there’s IPP’s on the board, which maybe we haven’t considered as much. I think it’s just been used as a buffer a lot until later in the game when it was less likely to be used to backdoor the USSR!

  • @chris_henry taking mongolia is just too easy of a grab for the extra $ for USSR plus it helps the CCP by having territory adjacent to USSR. its simple and doesn’t require many units.

  • @theveteran Yeah, but I still think it should be annexed, not invaded, since it is a soviet puppet state.

  • @david-06 annex it sure, but don’t take away the victory points for holding it at the end of the game.

  • 2021 2020 '19 '18 '17

    @theveteran Yeah, it’s definitely a good point. I think we’ve really just been overlooking the value of an easy lend-lease area for the CCP by doing this earlier in the game than has typically happened!

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys