Sounds like the Allies are doing really well. The allies need a meat grinder to wear down the axis with the allies’ numerical superiority.
Japan is an island?
-
No. The “islands” are considered the small ones. Not Australia , UK, or Japan
-
Small as in phil, sumatra, borneo, celebs, java I think those are the only islands with 2+ ipcs
-
hmm, what about New Z?
-
all other islands no factory
-
Japan IS an island according to A&A terminology since its a territory that is completely surrounded by a single sea zone. Japan and United Kingdom are NOT islands according to this definition. Some people claim that there is a contradiction with the complex build rule and Japan since its an island and does have a complex. I. Disagree since the rule prohibits placing newly purchased complexes on islands. Japan’s complex exists from the setup therefore it never violates this rule anyways. It’s not nearly as complex or confusing as people make it. Just don’t place NEW complexes on “islands” as defined by A&A.
-
Even if Japan being technically an Island seems to violate the “No Industrial Complexes on Islands” rule, common sense would dictate that this rule is trumped by the fact that the territory of Japan is a MAJOR Axis capital.
Can anyone really imagine a major Axis power not being allowed to build units in it’s own capital? -
I thought it stated in the rulebook that Japan was an exception to this rule because of that fact.
-
The rule isn’t that ICs can’t exist on islands. It’s that they can’t be “built” there (pg.23, pg.27).
Ohandbytheway, according to pg.8, “an island or island group is a single territory surrounded entirely (emphasis mine) by one or more sea zones” - and surrounded by seazones means not bordering other territories. Therefore, the UK is not an island. For that, matter, neither is Scotland. The Brits can build a minor on Scotland. For that matter, so could the Germans.
Japan is an island. And that means nothing, considering that scramble rules are no longer limited to islands. You can’t build an IC on Japan, per the rules. Big deal - it already has one. The distinction of it being an island means absolutely nothing anymore…
-
The distinction of Japan being an island was important using 1st edition OOB rules since you could only scramble from islands. Under 2nd edition rules it doesn’t matter at all that Japan is an island as far as I have discovered.
-
In AA50 the rule was that any territory entirely in one sea zone was considered an island; this worked perfectly considering Japan touched 2 different sea zones. Does anyone know why they went back to one sea zone around Japan?
-
Yes, according to Axis and Allies lore, Japan is a Continent. :)
-
I don’t see why it’s relevant that Japan is considered an Island (it is, by the very definition of island in the rules as noted by many) or that IC’s can’t be placed on islands.
Setup =/ Placement. The game starts with an IC there. You can’t place a new IC for an island, but the rules don’t contradict that you can start with an IC on an island.
-
But wouldn’t that mean that if you lose Japan and your IC gets downgraded to a minor that you couldn’t recapture and upgrade it again? That seems like a weird rule to me. Unlikely to come up in a game that isn’t decided already but it could happen.
-
Gekkepop,
But wouldn’t that mean that if you lose Japan and your IC gets downgraded to a minor that you couldn’t recapture and upgrade it again? That seems like a weird rule to me. Unlikely to come up in a game that isn’t decided already but it could happen.
––What you’re comparing is:
the REBUILDING an original I.C. vs.
the BUILDING a completely new I.C.Can you see the difference now?
“Tall Paul”
-
Correct. You can’t build ICs on islands.
It doesn’t say they can’t start with ICs.In my opinion Japan should have been multiple territories from the start
Honshu by itself (5)
Kyushu and Shikoku (2)
Hokkaido (1)And the sea of japan should have been a different sea zone than the pacific coast of Japan.
The Pacific map was made before non-island bases could scramble.
The 2nd edition map should have at least changed the sea zones to make Japan more like the UK (multiple territories, multiple sea zones)
It makes the game too easy for Japan with only one territory
to defend, and only one sea zone to defend. -
I agree that Japan should be split, and have two sz"s.
Then we could have Sea Lion on the Euro side, and Sea Serpent on the Pac side.
Suggested Topics
