There is no way to hold India if Japan plays a capture Calcutta at all cost opening strategy. It will fall and Japan will get a bit more income. Meanwhile, they will not be able to control China and will be missing out on big income from Pacific islands. Celebrate if they are putting a huge fleet in SZ39 because ANZAC + China will have huge income for the foreseeable future.
Japan & England
-
Why is Japan one territory in one sea zone, yet England is multiple territories in multiple sea zones?
Could not find answer elsewhere, forgive me if this was already explained.
-
Why is Japan one territory in one sea zone, yet England is multiple territories in multiple sea zones?
Could not find answer elsewhere, forgive me if this was already explained.
Probably because Japan is more isolated from a major power (the US) and so their navy can be built without too much worry early in the game, while if Britain had only one seazone surrounding it, the Germans and eventually Italians would be able to attack it easily with no safe place to build up again besides Canada. In addition, the Convoy zones allow Germany more options to place interdict, rather than one single spot requiring only one UK destroyer to sink them. In essence, balance and to achieve some degree of historic flavor with how the war around Britain played out (convoys from the US, the Channel, etc).
Should Japan have more than one seazone? Probably. But Japan has generally had only two seazones, and keeping it as one seazone is maybe of a carry over from AA50, while the UK has always had multiple seazones.
Airbases should just be able to scramble to adjacent Seazones, thereby eliminating the island rule mumbo jumbo while allowing the UK to have SOME control of the English Channel.
-
Airbases should just be able to scramble to adjacent Seazones, thereby eliminating the island rule mumbo jumbo while allowing the UK to have SOME control of the English Channel.
AGREED!
Suggested Topics
