@Tigerman77:
Question #20 about Japans taking the DEI. I envisioned the DEI as pro-allied but not effecting the US in any way. If there are any UK/Anzac/FEC units in a territory of the DEI and Japan attacks it obviously a declaration of war. Do we need to explain this rule any better?
No, that is how it comes across to me in the rules and it works for the most part IMO. Allowing a Japanese invasion of the DEI (while Dutch) w/o any consequences is what feels a little off to me. Maybe just an inf added to def Borneo so that the Japanese can’t just walk in (don’t know for sure, but seems like something should have been stationed there).
Just thought that the US event list could include a direct Japanese attack on the DEI (while Dutch) as well, even if it lowered one of the others on the list (maybe the W Hemisphere to+25). The US wouldn’t have declared war over it, but I think it would have taken notice with blatant Japanese aggression w/oil embargo and all. Not a big deal, just a thought.
**BTW Western Hemisphere can also include parts of Africa, and Europe and small part of Russia in some interpretations (don’t think that is your intent). When you say W Hem you are talking about just the Americas and adjacent islands right. Where would Greenland and Iceland fall in your rules.
Also while I’m on the subject of W Hem, I heard there might be changes to the units placement in 4.1 (upgrade to 5.0). In our first game we found it way to easy for the UK to claim Brazil (which is fine), but to just walk into the other unoccupied S American countries was a joke. We will add 1-2 inf to each of them in our next game so there is some resistance, hope the update will do something along those lines.
@Tigerman77:
Question #25 on Japan naval movement in US zones. Im still looking at this but I’m leaning to adding that Japanese units can not end their turn in the same zone as US units or in a sea zone next to a US territory. This will be explained in the next revision of the rules. As for now there is nothing in the rules stopping Japan from moving into US occupied sea zones.
Ok, we will probably address it with similar restrictions until the rules get updated. Do you have any idea when the units placement and rules update will be. Are we talking soon, or a month from now?
Other things to consider in the update are including canal, and straight rules (don’t remember seeing anything, but I could be wrong). We are using G40 for that for the most part. You have ruled on the Dane straight can be used by anyone while Denmark is neutral, that doesn’t work for the Turks straight though. Is it closed from the start, or is there a trigger? Can subs move through the Gib straight?
Please don’t take these comments as criticism, we are having a great time in our first game and addressing minor things as we go. We are getting a lot of help along the way from this thread (you guys have been terrific).
**Edit, One last thing:
The role of a fighter has really change in this game. Ftrs have traditionally gotten a big def boost. I didn’t always get that because it would take time to get them in the air, but that’s the way it has always been. This game has them as a 6-6 unit. With the 12 sided dice system I would have thought they would def at 7 (not 8 which would be the same as 4 w/6D). As a whole air are pretty crappy defenders in this game. I guess it solves the allies flying ftrs to def Moscow LOL. Just seems strange seeing it be like a flying tank as far as values go on defense.
Is this under review?
Maybe give ftrs +1 from an operational air base when defending the territory the AB is in. An AB would include an early warning radar system that would allow for the +1 def value. Would need to tweak RAF in United Kingdom def to +1 (would also get +1 for AB making it +2).
Even if it was a limited +1 boost to a max of 3 ftrs def territory w/AB (maybe include tacs). Similar to an AB allows a limited number of ftrs/tacs (3) to scramble to SZs.