I always treated starting money as separate from income in my head. In this game the rules states that you should use the “starting income list” to take starting money. If i remember correctly, there have been versions of axis where some powers have started with less money than their starting income.
Income ownership
-
When playing Global and specifically regarding the United Kingdom and their two economies, if the UK Pacific takes over Persia, which side receives the income? UK Pac or UK Atlantic?
Same thing in regards to if the UK Atlantic sends their transport from Egypt with their men over to take over Java which side receives the income? UK Pac or UK Atlantic?
Same thing in regards to if the UK Pacific sends transport over from India and takes over Ethiopia from Italy, which side receives the income? Uk Pac of Uk Atlantic?
Is it solely determined by which side of the map the conquered territory is on (Europe or Pacific) to determine who receives the income regardless of which UK originated armies conquer the country?
-
Yes, the only thing that matters is where the territory sits. If you send Anzac troops, that can affect ownership, but UK pacific troops behave exactly the same as UK Europe troops – they always claim each territory on behalf of the economy that matches the map. Persia is European, Java is Pacific, always.
-
correct. It helps to remember its one army but two economies. So maybe we call it the British army funded by England on one side and India on the other… so the British army, not UK pacific, claimed Persia.
-
Two rules that are forgotten about UK and why I hate the fact they have two economies instead of one is that West India is part of India and so is Western Canada.
-
If you play Global, Western Canada is given to London.
-
ok, thanks for the clarifications
-
One thing that will help in these situations is the concept that there’s no such thing as “UK Europe unit” or a “UK Pacific unit”. UK Europe and Pacific are separate economies, not powers, so only the functions regarding income collection and expenditure are separated. Once a unit is mobilized, regardless of where that may be, it is simply a UK unit. All UK units move together, attack together, defend together, etc., without regard to where they originated.
-
One thing that will help in these situations is the concept that there’s no such thing as “UK Europe unit” or a “UK Pacific unit”. UK Europe and Pacific are separate economies, not powers, so only the functions regarding income collection and expenditure are separated. Once a unit is mobilized, regardless of where that may be, it is simply a UK unit. All UK units move together, attack together, defend together, etc., without regard to where they originated.
True enough. However, because of various geopolitical factors (the wide dispersion of the UK’s territories around the world; the large size of the Pacific and of the Eurasian land mass; the awkward location of certain Axis territories), the UK’s assets have the drawback of being semi-compartamentalized. In other words: although it’s possible for the UK to build a unit with the income of one economy and deploy it at in IC associated with that economy and then send it to “reinforce” the other half of the board, it can potentially take a long trip by land or by sea for it to reach a particular location where a player would like to have it. On the other hand, it could be argued that these geopolitical factors serve to explain why the UK economies are considered separate in the first place.
I was thinking (not at all seriously) that some kind of “offshore tax shelter” house rule could be devised as a back-channel that would allow the UK to transfer its IPCs between the two halves of its economy without violating A&A’s version of the applicable tax laws (i.e., the rulebook). One OOB rule does come close, however: “Either economy can pay all or part of the cost of conducting Research and Development. The results apply to the power as a whole.”
-
I think Gandhi is going to have a lot to say about your “mobilizing” more Indian volunteers using British pounds from London. :-D
-
@Charles:
I think Gandhi is going to have a lot to say about your “mobilizing” more Indian volunteers using British pounds from London. :-D
I think Gandhi would rather deal with British Imperialism than Japanese.
Suggested Topics
