National objectives



  • @Krieghund:

    @Atlantikwall:

    @Lynxes:

    UK

    Allied control of any Japanese 1941 at-start territory [Manchuria & Kiangsu are Japanese-controlled Chinese territories]= 5 IPCs.

    Does “territory” also apply to zero-IPC islands like lwo Jima or Carloline Islands?

    Yup.

    Hmm, that makes things considerably more interesting.  Japan is not going to be able to strip the Carolines and Iwo Jime of troops because of the Allied IPC bonus, which means that Japan is going to be strapped for infantry and transports, and now transports have to be escorted.  Iwo Jima is one move from the US West Coast.  Krieghund, will destroyers be able to carry one infantry unit in this game, or is that not going to be allowed?  Also, is this bonus per territory captured, i.e. 5 IPC per territory captured, or 5 IPC as long as you capture one without regard to total captured?



  • @timerover51:

    @Krieghund:

    @Atlantikwall:

    @Lynxes:

    UK

    Allied control of any Japanese 1941 at-start territory [Manchuria & Kiangsu are Japanese-controlled Chinese territories]= 5 IPCs.

    Does “territory” also apply to zero-IPC islands like lwo Jima or Carloline Islands?

    Yup.

    Hmm, that makes things considerably more interesting.  Japan is not going to be able to strip the Carolines and Iwo Jime of troops because of the Allied IPC bonus, which means that Japan is going to be strapped for infantry and transports, and now transports have to be escorted.  Iwo Jima is one move from the US West Coast.  Krieghund, will destroyers be able to carry one infantry unit in this game, or is that not going to be allowed?  Also, is this bonus per territory captured, i.e. 5 IPC per territory captured, or 5 IPC as long as you capture one without regard to total captured?

    That was a revised NA, and there arent any in this game, so I doubt it.


  • Official Q&A

    @timerover51:

    Krieghund, will destroyers be able to carry one infantry unit in this game, or is that not going to be allowed?

    No.

    @timerover51:

    Also, is this bonus per territory captured, i.e. 5 IPC per territory captured, or 5 IPC as long as you capture one without regard to total captured?

    5 IPCs total if one or more is held.



  • Some more infos about the national objectives today? Probably the total number of them and the figures for each country?

    On a day where the US (markets) create so much turmoil, one should release some good news to satisfy the world 😉!


  • Official Q&A

    @Atlantikwall:

    Some more infos about the national objectives today?

    No, a tech today - another National Objective next time.



  • Well, I continue using parenthesis-values for speculation and without parenthesis for confirmed ones. I was pretty sure for the third Japanese bonus since I thought I could read it from a BGG pic, but I’m now more cautious.

    I tweaked my speculations in your direction, squirecam, with a number to take. I assume the post-war political goals of UK and Soviet Union will be included in some way, would make sense since Churchill was more concerned with European politics than the Americans who just wanted to win the war ASAP and were ignorant if remote nations became communist-dominated…

    By the way, Squirecam has given away parts of some objectives, and those parts are now edited in. All fully confirmed techs are by Krieghund.


  • Official Q&A

    @Lynxes:

    UK

    *(Allied control of at least four out of: Gibraltar, Morocco/Algeria, Libya, Egypt and/or Transjordan=5 IPCs)

    This is actually 5 IPCs for control of Eastern Canada, Western Canada, Gibraltar, Egypt, Australia and Union of South Africa.



  • Again, thanks, Krieghund!


  • Official Q&A

    Update:

    @Lynxes:

    Japan

    • Axis control of at least four out of: (Hong-kong, Netherlands East Indies, Borneo, Phillippine Islands, New Guinea and/or Solomon Islands)= 5 IPCs

    This one is correct, though technically it’s Kwangtung, not Hong Kong (Hong Kong is the Victory City in the territory of Kwangtung).



  • *(Hawaiian Islands+Midway+Marshall Islands+Wake Island+Okinawa+Iwo Jima)=5 IPCs

    How correct is this one?


  • Official Q&A

    Double update today, since Larry posted these on his site:

    @Lynxes:

    Soviet Union

    • Archangelsk + no Allied units on red areas= 5 IPCs

    This is correct.

    @Lynxes:

    US/China

    *(Hawaiian Islands+Midway+Marshall Islands+Wake Island+Okinawa+Iwo Jima)=5 IPCs

    The US gains 5 IPCs if Allied powers control at least 3 of the following territories: Midway, Wake Island, Hawaiian Islands and/or Solomon Islands.



  • Thanks, again! I’ll try to get Imperious Leaders attention so that he adds all these updates to the Fact sheet as well.

    This one gives Japan an incentive to grab two of Wake, Midway and Solomons. They weren’t very valuable in resource terms but rather represented forward air bases that could keep the Americans farther from the homeland. Another thing that the game does to favour a Pacific strategy for Japan rather than a land one, I like it!


  • Official Q&A

    @Krieghund:

    @Lynxes:

    Soviet Union

    • Archangelsk + no Allied units on red areas= 5 IPCs

    This is correct.

    Whoops, I didn’t read this one closely enough!  :oops:

    5 IPCs if no other Allied forces are present in territories controlled by the USSR and if the Soviets control Archangel.

    A subtle difference, but an important one.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    already added to fact sheet.



  • Hey, IL, maybe you could edit out what I have edited out? Some of the National objectives you list have already been deleted by me because of corrections, and your fact sheet right now is a bit confusing.

    The sooner we get the full picture, the sooner we could start discussing what the changes means for game-play!



  • Well, I’ll help IL out, this time with adjusting those IPC values for the National objectives that we know of. After all, we’re almost there and I do think we have all the objectives that would influence IPCs the first turn. So the new IPC values are (IL, feel free to take these and update the fact thread):

    '41 scenario:
    Germany 31  (+ 5 IPC bonus controlled at-start)
    Soviet Union 30 (+ 5 IPC bonus controlled at-start)
    Japan 17 (+5 IPC bonus controlled at-start)
    UK 43 (+5 IPC bonus controlled at-start)
    Italy 10 (+5 IPC bonus controlled at-start)
    US/China 40 (+15 IPC bonuses controlled at-start), China produces 1 free inf for each two Chinese territories controlled at the start of US turn.

    IPC balance (bonuses included, 2 inf worth of China inf):
    Axis: 73, Allies: 144.

    '42 scenario:
    Germany 37  (+ 10 IPC bonuses controlled at-start)
    Soviet Union 24 (+ 5 IPC bonus controlled at-start)
    Japan 31 (+10 IPC bonuses controlled at-start)
    UK 31 (+5 IPC bonus controlled at-start)
    Italy 10 (+5 IPC bonus controlled at-start)
    US/China 38 (+ 5 IPC bonus controlled at-start), China produces 1 free inf for each two Chinese territories controlled at the start of US turn.

    IPC balance (bonuses included, 2 inf worth of China inf):
    Axis: 103, Allies: 114.

    We now see even more clearly that the job of the Axis the first few turns is to tilt the balance when it comes the the National objectives (NOs). This clearly changes the game a lot since NOs specify areas such as Egypt and Gibraltar, Wake Island and Solomon Islands, Archangelsk. All are targets that now are decisive but in AAR wasn’t so much so. The game will be less focused on destroying units and more focused on territory, and this in my opinion makes it closer to the real war, where the historical tug between the generals wanting to destroy armies and politicians wanting to take symbolic locations will now be in the game!


  • Official Q&A

    Update:

    @Lynxes:

    Germany

    • (Karelia+Archangelsk+Russia+Caucasus) = 5 IPCs

    5 IPCs if Axis powers control at least one of the following: Karelia S.S.R. and/or Caucasus.

    The German National Objectives are now complete.



  • @Lynxes:

    Japan

    • (Hawaiian Islands+Australia+India) =5 IPCs

    I think this one sounds very reasonnable, but is it also true?



  • /atlantikwall

    I read this from the BGG pic, but it was kind of fuzzy so I’m not sure it’s completely correct. It could be “two out of…” or something like that.


  • Official Q&A

    Update:

    @Lynxes:

    Japan

    • (Hawaiian Islands+Australia+India) =5 IPCs

    5 IPCs if Axis powers control at least one of the following: Hawaiian Islands, Australia and/or India.

    The Japanese National Objectives are now complete.



  • Well, we’re getting close now. Just three objectives that are not known. Maybe we should start to discuss the change the NOs will mean for the game. Apart from the general changes I listed above on the thread I think we should see changes to campaign theaters such as:

    Russia: Karelia is again an important space since it’s worth 5 IPCs and also building capacity. It’s also the gate to Archangelsk. All this probably means that the Soviet player must be more offensive, even more so than in AAR. I think the Russian campaign will be more volatile and unpredictable. I will also expect a lot of involvement from other powers, such as Italian invasions of Caucasus and UK invasions of Scandinavia. Maybe a UK wearing down of Karelia in a first attack without gaining control to prepare for a decisive Soviet attack will be a common move.

    Africa: Gibraltar and Egypt are worth a lot of IPCs for Italy and UK. Great that Gibraltar now can be reached directly from the Atlantic, we will see a lot of combat taking place there. Also valuable as an air base vs. the Italians. Just landing forces in Marocco or French West Africa might be inadequate now, so a South African IC will be common, especially if UK finds it too dangerous to build an IC in India. Retaking Egypt will take a two-pronged assault from west and south. And of course getting naval forces into the Med. will be a major first step for the UK and US players to coordinate, so much more naval builds in the Atlantic will be needed, inevitably postponing D-day and giving the Germans more time.

    Pacific: Midway, Wake and Solomons are now valuable and the US must very quickly get a presence in the Pacific. Perhaps two whole turns of production on the West coast to get a sizable fleet? Australia will be a US responsibility to divert Japanese attention from or to retake if lost, demanding even more forces. UK efforts will be tied up in Africa and India, and probably keeping India needs Russian help. Perhaps UK attacks in Scandinavia and Karelia will be a trade-off for Russian help in India? Needless to say, keeping Hawaii is a MUST for the US player, and actually takes precedence to all other war aims. This is as it should be and makes perfect historical sense.



  • *Italy+(Libya+Balkans)+No enemy ships in Med sea zones, sz 13,14,15 [transports and submarines do not count]= 5 IPCs, (we know that Italy and these three sea zones are involved, but not all the details)

    Its Italy +balkans + algeria + lybia + no ships.

    Basically, all the stuff Italy already owns.



  • I’m hoping we get the last UK objective next… Russia’s we can guess at within reasonable accuracy, I really wanna know what’s going on with the UK!!


  • Official Q&A

    Sometimes wishes do come true!

    @Lynxes:

    UK

    • (Allied control of at least three out of: Norway, Finland, Northwestern Europe, France and/or Balkans=5 IPCs)

    5 IPCs if Allied powers control at least one of the following: France and/or Balkans.

    The UK National Objectives are now complete.



  • Wow… that’s a total of 10 IPC for the Allies if they take France, plus whatever else it’s worth… something tells me D-Days will be quite frequent!


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
  • 5
  • 18
  • 3
  • 11
  • 41
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

84
Online

14.4k
Users

34.9k
Topics

1.4m
Posts