How nice. They look very straightforwardly, I guess they are great help to make the game run more streamlined.
Will Canada be playable at 6-8 IPCs
-
For clarity, in terms of fighter production I meant just that. Not keeping them in Canada but if a NO was phrased so that it simulates the BCATP then I could live with the idea, game balance pending.
#594
Okay, gotcha.
But what is IMTO?
In My Temporary Opinion.
My Posts are like Swayze.
Read fast.#596
-
For clarity, in terms of fighter production I meant just that. Not keeping them in Canada but if a NO was phrased so that it simulates the BCATP then I could live with the idea, game balance pending.
#594
Okay, gotcha.
But what is IMTO?
In My Temporary Opinion.
My Posts are like Swayze.
Read fast.#596
Hmm… IMTO … I like it.
-
Well IMTO the Commonwealth should permit the UK player to remain in the game post-Sealion and should disperse production.
Now that’s a pretty normative statement ranking up there with I shouldn’t pay so much in tax and my fries should never be cold, so the harsh realities of game balance arise to make me think that’s a pipe dream.
Now aside from that I’m thinking patriotism might be the only reason that someone would actually volunteer to play Canada.
#597
-
Now aside from that I’m thinking patriotism might be the only reason that someone would actually volunteer to play Canada.
Entirely.
-
In terms of giving Canada a role based on its historical contribution, to make matters worse (of course) using it as a fighter factory and then having a huge RCAF wouldn’t be historically correct either.
The T in BCATP stands for Training after all. So maybe half of the air units being “produced” in Canada should actually be UK units.
Couldn’t use the maple syrup-flavoured Cdn pieces at all. Pity.
#598
-
Yes, please put in an independent Canadian power that will take 10-15 IPCs away from the UK when it really needs them the most at the start of the game during US/USSR neutrality. This will ensure German Sealion attempts to be 100% successful all of the time.
Thank you.
-
OK, I’ll bite: how do you get 10-15 IPCs?
#600
-
OK, I’ll bite: how do you get 10-15 IPCs?
…and why would the Canadian player/controller place units in Canada unless it was advantageous to them?
-
Yeah, the person who said it just weakens the UK and makes SeaLion more likely is 100% correct :-o
Dispersing the UK income just means it has less resilience to Axis attacks, i.e. it falls into the “I can’t buy anything useful this turn so I’ll just save money” category. This gives the Axis continuous initiative. Similarly, at 10IPCs or less for Canada etc, they can’t huy anything useful either. 1 DD in the Atlantic per turn will just get killed off by lucky German Subs and Bombers.
Even worse, this splits the attacks of the Allies. Previously you may have had 3-4 Allied DDs in the Atlantic operating as a nasty ASW force. Now you will have 1-2 each, making each attack weaker.
I can’t believe the designers didn’t think of this, and if they did, what was their superior justification? :?
Cheers,
Lozza007
-
What about making Canada a separate minor power with a national objective, but to counter weakening the UK, don’t split UK income. It will give the UK more money and deploying options, and if Japan doesn’t attack, the DEI money will come in handy to replace lost Canadian IPCs.
-
If Canada were to be a seperate power in AAE40 I would like them to:
a) have at least 10 IC
b) have a series of NOs for the UK linked to keeping the commonwealth intact. So, As long as Canada, India, ANZAC and S. Africa remain intact the UK gets bonus cash. When one or all fall, their bonus cash (via NOs) evaporates.
That way the designers could allow options for a minor Canada ally while also keeping the UK economically viable (and relaint on its overseas colonies)
-
OK, I’ll bite: how do you get 10-15 IPCs?
#600
If Canada is around 6-8 IPCs, and has a +5 NO bonus for staying intact (like the US) as suggested, it will definitely be around 10-15 IPCs a round. The only logical place for the Canadian units to invade would be North Africa or France. I doubt there would be a minor/major industry placed in Western Canada, just a major placed in Eastern Canada.
I just think it will be a bad idea as the UK income is already split into the European and Pacific theaters, splitting the European UK AGAIN into Canadian and British powers spells bad news for England at the beginning of the game, when Germany will be at its strongest with the UK as its only enemy for the first 3 rounds.
I guess the Canadian power could be used to liberate the UK once or twice on the second and/or third turns from the Germans.
-
Canada should have about 1/5th to maybe as much as 1/4 the IPC of england proper. That would be about 2 IPC, which doesn’t reflect the US to Canada ratio of 10:1 on GDP. A simple guide to GDP production ratios would be a 9:3:1 of USA:Britain:Canada. So if Canada were to have an income of 10, britain (scotland, northern ireland, wales and england) would be 30 and the US 90. So with commonwealth countries Britain would be maybe in the mid 40s without Canada then?
I just think Canada’s GDP is too small to justify as an individual power. California has (maybe not then) now a larger GDP and population then Canada so….
-
If Canada is its own power, it would be about the same size as the Anzac in Pac (13-15 ipc w/NO). The UK will get hammered the first couple of rounds because its allies may still be neutral. I could see the axis gaining control of Africa, and the Middle east plus having ships (subs) around England very early on (convoy’s). UK will become like India in Pac, a very poor minor power. We would be talking about a round 3 London crush, just like there is the India crush in Pac, and there would be noway to stop it (bye bye UK). Look at the bright side though, Canada would still be a minor power in play (not that it could do anything) :-D.
You have to keep in mind that there is normally no fighting going on in North America, so why would you want to be forced to mobilize units there and then fly/transport them over to where the fighting is (you would be creating a mini US w/o the resources to make a difference). As the UK I want to get units into Africa (S Africa IC), or ships directly into the waters surrounding England. Don’t handicap game play for UK for symbolic reasons. I like the fact the Canada gets a minor IC (that shows it importance). If UK it unable to drop ships in the water due to axis presence, the Hudson, or Quebec coast will be a great addition to the game for building navy in a safe zone. You could use all UK resources and drop in a carrier, and or BB (not just 10-15 Canadian ipc’s), then bring them over on your next turn and add to them creating a formidable force (a great option).
-
I’m not sure how the new neutrals work, the british allies in a game of AA stay neutral until a specific event? Hitorically the only ally that sat back during the first part of WWII was the United States……From wiki:
The United Kingdom and other independent members of the British Commonwealth, known as the Dominions, declared war on Germany separately, either on the same day, or soon afterwards; these countries were Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. However, Newfoundland had given up self-rule and was at the time under effective rule from the UK; it did not become part of Canada until 1949. Southern Rhodesia, while self-governing, did not have independence in foreign policy or military matters.
Following the Statute of Westminster in 1931, the Dominions of the British Commonwealth had independence in foreign policy. Australia and New Zealand accepted and reiterated the British declaration of war on Germany. The South African Prime Minister, Barry Hertzog, refused to declare war, leading to the collapse of his coalition government on 6 September; the new Prime Minister, Jan Smuts, declared war that same day. Canada declared war on Germany on 10 September; this was necessary as Canada had ratified the Statute.
The Indian Empire (including the areas and peoples covered by the later Republic of India, Bangladesh and Pakistan) and territories controlled by the Colonial Office, namely the Crown Colonies, were controlled politically by the UK and therefore also entered hostilities with Britain’s declaration of war. The Indian Empire contributed about 2,500,000 personnel. It suffered 1,500,000 civilian casualties (more than the United Kingdom), mainly from the Bengal famine of 1943 caused by the fall of Burma to the Japanese,[15] and 87,000 military casualties (more than any Commonwealth country but fewer than the United Kingdom). The UK suffered 382,000 military casualties.
-
When I said UK’s allies could be neutral the first couple of rounds I was referring to the US, and Russia for game play (neither can attack until round #4 unless axis invite them into the war early). I know that the UK Commonwealth threw in w/England very early on, and that will be represented in the game with all those English IC’s and the Anzac.
-
Ah yes, I did forget to mention the USSR was also neutral (or slightly on the axis side initially with their invasion of poland a few weeks after the Germans started).
Is that how the new game will work, round 4 or by axis invite or is this how an existing version works with neutral allies?
So a neutral would be able to have full IPC income and build up, do non-combat moves but no attacks and presumably not reinforce existing non-neutral countries’ territories? Are certain sea zones restricted? Would the neutral countries fleet not block either of the other two waring parties fleets? It sounds like a pretty cool extra dimension to the game.
-
What, have you been living in a cave the last 8 months? (just kidding)
Ah yes, I did forget to mention the USSR was also neutral (or slightly on the axis side initially with their invasion of poland a few weeks after the Germans started).
Yes in Euro40 Russia will start off neutral to the Euro axis. It will collect income and build, but can’t attack until round #4 unless it is attacked. In the global game Russia will be neutral to the Euro axis as above, but any thing goes on the Jap side (there is no NAP).
Is that how the new game will work, round 4 or by axis invite or is this how an existing version works with neutral allies?
Yes, that’s how it works in Pac40 w/US. See below
So a neutral would be able to have full IPC income and build up, do non-combat moves but no attacks and presumably not reinforce existing non-neutral countries’ territories? Are certain sea zones restricted? Would the neutral countries fleet not block either of the other two waring parties fleets? It sounds like a pretty cool extra dimension to the game.
In Pac 40 the US starts off neutral, and can’t make attacks or move into its eventual allies tt until rd #4 (unless its brought into the war early). Jap can attack them at any time bringing the US in early (an unprovoked Jap attack on UK/Anzac will also bring the US in early). The US starts w/17ipc income, but gets a 40ipc increase the turn it enters the war (in its collect income phase) for 57 ipc tot. As far as I know Russia doesn’t get a war time income bonus (it will already have a good size economy). I don’t know what the war time bonus is for the US in the Euro40 game, but I understand that it will be 30ipc/round in the global game.
As far as the sea goes, neutral powers can share sz w/eventual allies, or potential enemies. Neutrals can’t block movement. Also say in Europe Germany and UK are at war (will start that way), if the US (neutral) moves ships into a sz w/UK ships, Germany can ignore the US ships and attack only the UK ships. Germany could attack both fleets if it wants to, but would first have to declare itself at war w/US (presumably at the beginning of its turn). The US would then be able to attack on its next turn, and the war time economy would start as well at US collect income phase (end of US turn). Speaking of the sea, you will have to control certain tt to pass though the 3 straights on the Euro side (Denmark, Gilb, and Turk) similar to how canals work.
Because of the early start date (June 1940) there will be a lot of countries that start off neutral, and will be in play. Some will be pro axis, some pro allies. If a country is pro to your side you can move in during the noncombat phase and take ownership, its standing army (if it has one) joins your side. If its pro your enemy then you must defeat the standing army in combat to take ownership. There will also be true neutrals in the game (countries that have been off limits like Turkey, Spain, Saudi, and Sweden) that you can invade. Invading a true neutral could have consequences though (like attack one and others turn on you) not sure at this point, but it will make things interesting for sure.
The political rules add a lot of flavor to the game, but can be confusing. The Pac40 rule book is now posted on the Avalon Hill web site. I would suggest you also print the Faq/Errata for Pac40, as there are many changes. The political rules and new units will carry over in the new Euro40/global game, so getting familiar with them now would be a good idea (or buy Pac40), August 24th is just around the corner.
-
Thanks for the comprehendsive explanation. As to where I have been in the past 8 months or 8 years for that matter is playing in AA revised in a small pool of players in a small backwaters town in Canada. I joined this site about 2 months ago and having thought AA Pac,Euro, revised were the ONLY 3 flavours until Spring 42 came out. It has been a suprise to see all the versions and new concepts (NOs, new techs etc, neutral powers). It also seems I am beeing schooled on Spring 42 by fleetwood dan much to my chagrin. I have much to learn!
Suggested Topics
