So if the US flies a plane to France. Germany can not attack France without declaring war on the US?
The US (starting neutral) can’t land a plane in France while being neutral.
So the answer to your question is ‘yes’ in case
HTH :-)
Do you want canada as a power
-
Re-balancing the game with Canada added would take a lot of play-testing.
-
@Brain:
Re-balancing the game with Canada added would take a lot of play-testing.
I’M SORRY BD
WHAT WAS THAT?!?!
WOTC WOULD NEED A LOT OF PLAY-TESTING?? ??
MAN, YOU’LL HAVE TO TYPE LOUDER I CAN’T HEAR OVER EVERYONE YELLING “OH OH PICK ME! PICK ME!”
:-D#516
-
Fighters are gonna be SO valuable for UK in this game. The ability to sortie out of Britain to protect your new naval builds is gonna put alot of pressure on the German aircraft. Or if theres a complex in Canada, UK can just build its navy there I guess and bring it over when it has enough planes.
So UK is gonna have to worry about protecting its Atlantic Navy with fighters while securing it’s convoys, building units in India to protect against Japan, and sending forces to Africa to fend of Italy.
I think they’re gonna be the most fun country to play in this game.
-
no people see why canada is important you can bulid planes\ships there so you bulid ground on the uk!
good aganst sealion. -
Fighters are gonna be SO valuable for UK in this game. The ability to sortie out of Britain to protect your new naval builds is gonna put alot of pressure on the German aircraft. Or if theres a complex in Canada, UK can just build its navy there I guess and bring it over when it has enough planes.
So UK is gonna have to worry about protecting its Atlantic Navy with fighters while securing it’s convoys, building units in India to protect against Japan, and sending forces to Africa to fend of Italy.
I think they’re gonna be the most fun country to play in this game.
Yea, I agree that they should be… But will they? If Scotland is to be a territory, then Britain will no longer be an island, so will fighters on Britain still be able to scramble to protect their fleets? I think they should, b/c what’s the difference between england and Japan? But I don’t know what the rules will be. And sign me up for play-testing any day, free of charge.
-
Ha ha ha… then the info wouldn’t be a secret. remember its not that they dont WANT to tell us information…its that larry and kreig CANT tell us information. They aren’t allowed to.
-
Ha ha ha… then the info wouldn’t be a secret. remember its not that they dont WANT to tell us information…its that larry and kreig CANT tell us information. They aren’t allowed to.
They can neither confirm or deny this statement.
-
@The:
Fighters are gonna be SO valuable for UK in this game. The ability to sortie out of Britain to protect your new naval builds is gonna put alot of pressure on the German aircraft. Or if theres a complex in Canada, UK can just build its navy there I guess and bring it over when it has enough planes.
So UK is gonna have to worry about protecting its Atlantic Navy with fighters while securing it’s convoys, building units in India to protect against Japan, and sending forces to Africa to fend of Italy.
I think they’re gonna be the most fun country to play in this game.
Yea, I agree that they should be… But will they? If Scotland is to be a territory, then Britain will no longer be an island, so will fighters on Britain still be able to scramble to protect their fleets? I think they should, b/c what’s the difference between england and Japan? But I don’t know what the rules will be. And sign me up for play-testing any day, free of charge.
If England is going to be two territories and therefore can’t scramble, it will be so annoying! What is the point of making England two territories anyway when Japan is one and the entire eastern seaboard of the US is one? I could understand if they do that so that UK can’t scramble its planes in 5 different sea zones from a single territory, that makes sense (Scotland can scramble to 2 & 3, maybe 6; England can scramble to 6, 7, & 8’), but otherwise I’ll be very upset if Great Britain isn’t an exception to the “only islands can scramble, and islands are a single territory surrounded by sea zones” rule. :x
-
@The:
Fighters are gonna be SO valuable for UK in this game. The ability to sortie out of Britain to protect your new naval builds is gonna put alot of pressure on the German aircraft. Or if theres a complex in Canada, UK can just build its navy there I guess and bring it over when it has enough planes.
So UK is gonna have to worry about protecting its Atlantic Navy with fighters while securing it’s convoys, building units in India to protect against Japan, and sending forces to Africa to fend of Italy.
I think they’re gonna be the most fun country to play in this game.
Yea, I agree that they should be… But will they? If Scotland is to be a territory, then Britain will no longer be an island, so will fighters on Britain still be able to scramble to protect their fleets? I think they should, b/c what’s the difference between england and Japan? But I don’t know what the rules will be. And sign me up for play-testing any day, free of charge.
If England is going to be two territories and therefore can’t scramble, it will be so annoying! What is the point of making England two territories anyway when Japan is one and the entire eastern seaboard of the US is one? I could understand if they do that so that UK can’t scramble its planes in 5 different sea zones from a single territory, that makes sense (Scotland can scramble to 2 & 3, maybe 6; England can scramble to 6, 7, & 8’), but otherwise I’ll be very upset if Great Britain isn’t an exception to the “only islands can scramble, and islands are a single territory surrounded by sea zones” rule. :x
So much for the Battle of Britain.
Yeah that would suck.
-
@Brain:
If you take money away from UK by giving it to others (Canada), then that will be the cause of UK’s impending failure.
Crap BD, you better tell Larry quick before they release the game and it’s totally unwinnable for the allies!
It shouldn’t come as a surprise to you guys that I like the idea of a forced build in Canada for the UK (or “split income” as Larry has stated).
This idea is novel, historically accurate and strategically important. Perhaps too small to be its own power (and Canada followed UK policy in the war anyway) There should be some way to represent the fact that so much of British wartime production came from Canada and had to cross the Atlantic before it was of any use. My guess is that, armed with an airbase, Canada will be the main centre for production of aircraft for the UK. (as was the case in the war.) If you can build 3 planes in Canada and use your 10 build in the UK for land/naval units it seems Canada would become an asset for production freeing space to pump out loaded landing craft in the British isles.
I think split income is a wonderful idea that I support greatly.
I think Canada as a whole separate power is a bit much. Canada is actually stronger as part of the UK than as an independent power. An independent Canada can’t attack with the UK. -
I think Canada as a whole separate power is a bit much. Canada is actually stronger as part of the UK than as an independent power. An independent Canada can’t attack with the UK.
Unless you made a rule that stated that commonwealth provinces could attack with the U.K.
-
ya you could do that contrys like anzac and maybe canada only have like 10-14 ipcs so a combined attack not that stronge
-
Historians are still debating whether it was or not
Which ones? Definitely not a Major Power like the United Kingdom, USA, USSR, Japan, Germany, France or Italy. However, if Canada did not aide the UK during WW2, (with food, munitions, tanks, heavy guns, airplanes, ships, etc) from 1939 to the entry of the USA in Dec 1941, there is a possibility that the UK might of had a much more difficult time than they did?
GOJEONGUMDO -
@The:
I think Canada as a whole separate power is a bit much. Canada is actually stronger as part of the UK than as an independent power. An independent Canada can’t attack with the UK.
Unless you made a rule that stated that commonwealth provinces could attack with the U.K.
So the net effect of this would be that they would have a different color?
Actually, they also wouldn’t share technology either unless there was a rule for that. Split income would basically be the same thing except simpler. -
I think I like the idea of Canada as a power
In normal aa games Canada is fust extra uk income if Canada had to ship there units over the atlantic that would enforce german submarines and make a battle for the atlantic -
@The:
I think Canada as a whole separate power is a bit much. Canada is actually stronger as part of the UK than as an independent power. An independent Canada can’t attack with the UK.
Unless you made a rule that stated that commonwealth provinces could attack with the U.K.
So the net effect of this would be that they would have a different color?
Actually, they also wouldn’t share technology either unless there was a rule for that. Split income would basically be the same thing except simpler.yea. It would basically mean different pieces (which is always cool), split incomes (which is more realistic), and also different capturing ownership (like in combined attacks and also just if Canada or Anzac takes something on it’s own.) So really it’s simple, more cool, and more realistic.
-
Well if they just make canada worth a decent number of ipcs (which I assume they will have too seeing as anything they make in the pacific will be used there) and give it a couple of minor complexes ( one in the center and another on the atlantic coast), then it will be used, and it will force the germans to put some effort into the atlantic to really hurt the convoy zones.
-
splitting the power will make the battle of Atlantic very interesting. With extra sea zones too!
I’m very excited about Europe. Hopefully, it can live up with our expectations!
Robert
-
@The:
yea. It would basically mean different pieces (which is always cool), split incomes (which is more realistic), and also different capturing ownership (like in combined attacks and also just if Canada or Anzac takes something on it’s own.) So really it’s simple, more cool, and more realistic.
Different pieces is cool, but we probably aren’t going to see that. Use the mint-green UK pieces from revised if Canada as a different color really matters to you.
My argument, though, is that a split-income, shared-pieces rule set like the original AA:P with India/Australia makes Canada stronger than having them as a whole separate power. It still forces UK to have forces cross the Atlantic (sweet), still gives Canada a bit of independence (also sweet), but allows for shared attacks and shared tech without many special rules (also good). Its actually in the end simpler to have split-income, shared-pieces. Having them as a separate power with shared movement would require a bunch of rule exceptions that would be hard to remember.
-
France was at least supposed to be a major power, until they got majorly stomped on by the Germans. Italy is a little different, but as far as I know they only became more subservient to Germany only after the war began. Though Italy never really was a major power on par with the others that we think of during the 20th century, the three major Axis powers—Germany, Japan, and Italy—were part of a military alliance on the signing of the Tripartite Pact in September 1940, which officially founded the Axis powers.
France and England have pretty much been the major powers of Europe for centuries, with Germany and Italy having more historic influence that was declining as they went into the 20th century, which was part of why they were looking to reestablish themselves in the first place. It was a big surprise when France fell so quickly. Canada doesn’t have any kind of historic claim to empires like Germany or Italy had, nor does it have any modern claim like UK and France have (they’re still 2 of the 5 permanent Security Council nations with veto power in the UN).
If you’ll notice, the current Allied countries that will be playable in the new version (with the exception of ANZAC) are the 5 permanent Security Council nations: US, UK, France, Russia, and China (though China was in the midst of civil war in WWII).
Suggested Topics
