Do you want canada as a power

[Flashman]

@Brain:

@Funcioneta:

@Flashman:

No Indian factory!

No, India needs a IC, or Japan will have a walk in the park

Some things are done in the interest of game balance.

Read the smallprint: UK can place infantry in India, but not mechanical units - they have to be shipped in from UK/Canada/Australia.  India is a big source of income for the UK (much bigger than is usually shown in A&A; this is the 2nd most populous country on earth and its lucky to be TWO territories), but is vulnerable if transport is disrupted, especially via Suez.

[i rock]

short summery.
canada has its on runndels, all provences will be repersented, problelys going to get an indestry, anzacs got there own guys.

buildings
so i think they will be a power with a minor indestry in quebec major ontario, air bases in newfoundland, naval bases in b.c nova soctia and newfoundland.

men
maybe 4-6 infantry 1-2 artliery 1 destroyer 1 transport and 1 cruiser.

thats what i would place in canada.

[idk_iam_swiss]

sounds more than fair to me

[Danger Mouse]

Canada needs to be a power as bad as Romania does, at what point do you say enough is enough and let it go.  Canada was an important part of the Allied effort but to deny England those forces during their turn is yet another hit on their available manpower and IC’s.  England needs everything it can get to keep up with Germany as it is, so this leaves no justification to have yet another power on the board that can only roll off a few infantry per turn and hope to god that their transports are not destroyed which would then render them impotent.

There should be a factory in Eastern Canada though.

Perhaps a “Raid on Dieppe” game would justify such action?

[xzorn]

Just give Canada a factory and a convoy. Hell, give the UK a minor one in England if you want them to spend the money elsewhere.

[Guest]

When I play as Axis, my opponent will be more than welcome to add Canada to their team. I will be more than happy to see them spend their money in Canada rather than UK where it is needed.

LV

[allboxcars]

@Brain:

When I play as Axis, my opponent will be more than welcome to add Canada to their team. I will be more than happy to see them spend their money in Canada rather than UK where it is needed.

LV

Which is too bad.
If production outside the UK unbalances the game then something is definitely broken.
Let the stack-monkeys game away all they want but historically, Winnie would have been breakdancing in Picadilly if every few months new Commonwealth troops just beamed down right where he needed them.
Battle of the Atlantic would’ve been a non-event.

#488

[Guest]

It would definitely give the Axis and added edge.

[The Fire Knight]

@Brain:

It would definitely give the Axis and added edge.

Ummm… Don’t think so. Last time I checked, the Allies won the war. So the allies have a big advantage. Adding Canada as a power could just be one of the ways to tone down that advantage. That’s not saying that I want to have Canada as a power or not (although ideally, I would prefer Canada and ANZAC as separate powers with special rules enabling them to coordinate attacks with the U.K.). So instead of artificially inflating the axis (like the B.S economy that Japan has and the unhistorical advantages that Germany and Italy will undoubtably have, you could just divide up the allies, making coordination harder (which actually does kind of make sense). Adding Canada as a power definitely won’t give the Axis an “added edge” b/c the game makers will realize this disadvantage and adjust the Axis accordingly (or not adjust them if you really think about it).

[allboxcars]

@Danger:

Perhaps a “Raid on Dieppe” game would justify such action?

Only perhaps?

uh yeah, I’m thinking Dieppe without Canadians would definitely make things too easy for the German player…

#492

[adam.hall]

@Canuck12:

3 reasons why Canada should be a separate power:

1)   Canada made at least a s large a military contribution to the war as ANZAC and a much larger supply/training contribution. If ANZAC gets its own economy so should Canada.

2)   Canada already has a unique roundel represented on the Pacific map so unless Canadian IPCs must be “claimed” like Dutch IPCs then there is no reason for the distinct roundel other than if Canada is to be its own power. Furthermore, Larry has stated that “All Canadian provinces will be represented” giving Canada more territories than the continental US, Anzac or Italy.

3)    If the UK was ever conquered by the Germans, Canada (as well as ANZAC) would have fought on along side the United States. Considering the heightened possibility of a successful Sealion, it is essential that Canada be a separate power to represent the continued production that would have come out of Canada if the UK fell.

I predict Canada will look and act much like ANZAC with a few infantry, a couple fighters, destroyer, a transport and about 8 IPCs at its own disposal. –It could be a great Sub-hunting power… who knows.

As a Canadian my immediate thought was “finally; agree; 100%.” After reading through this entire thread, I’m starting to think it just may bog down the game. Of course, I’m still curious what the roundels are foreshadowing in AAP40 if not as a separate power…

[Guest]

@The:

@Brain:

It would definitely give the Axis and added edge.

Adding Canada as a power could just be one of the ways to tone down that advantage.

Giving the Axis and edge or toning down the Allies advantage is the same thing.

Thanks for agreeing with your attempt at disagreeing,

[finnman]

I’m Canadian but having Anzac and as separate powers would spread the UK to thinly

[idk_iam_swiss]

Im fine with that. there are too many allies

[The Fire Knight]

That’s how it was in the real war though. Everyone was at war with the axis.

[Guest]

I guess we are going to need a partisan rule now too.

[Gharen]

I don’t think it would really hurt the Allies by having more nations that take turns on their side.  Yeah there is some adjustment in the IPC total and TUV as well but you can never underestimate the 1-2-3-now 4? punch that the allies could do any one of the axis powers.  I truthfully could go either way on this issue and seeing how ANZAC is a faction, and France got thrown in, it is possible to see Canada as a power of some sorts.  I think adding more factions to play adds more diversity and complexity to the game without having to drastically overhaul the game.  I think the Pacific 1940 board did give it away that they will be in the Europe counterpart map.  Yes, bogging down the game with 9+ players would slow it down but also make it more fun than the usual 1v1 games you see.  Its always cool to see new strategies develop from having several people stare at the same board.

[Omega]

In an ideal world, people would be ready to spend 12+ hours on a single Axis and Allies game

[Guest]

Personally I don’t care how long the game takes as long as I can leave it set up.

[Make_It_Round]

From Larry Harris:

“The US will NOT have a split income in the global game. However, one of the powers will indeed have a split income but not the US.”

So let’s put on our thinking caps here… The UK has to be the power with the split income.

No other power is spread out enough across the globe to warrant this treatment. So, probably some portion of IPCs will go to the UK proper and a smaller portion to the Industrial Complexes of the Commonwealth powers (or maybe just Canada). That would explain the Canadian unique roundel on Pac '40 (and might be an indication that South Africa may have its own roundel as well).

Same turn, same economy… split income! All the pieces fit! We may have an active Canadian presence in Europe Global '40 after all!  :-D