@The_Good_Captain The rule applies in all sea battles where there are sea units allied to the attacker present, regardless of the type(s) of defending German sea units. The rule mentions only German subs because the author failed to take into account the possibility that the situation could also exist with German surface units if they were mobilized in a hostile sea zone. This oversight was corrected in the Axis & Allies Pacific Rulebook.
Middle East $$$
-
can the allies use the $8 from the middle east??? i always thought they couldn’t
-
they can and do,
the thing is if Germany occupies them, then they still use and spend the money, but they have to give Germany the ipc’s back (i.e. England, i believe, would get the 8 ipcs, but they might co-erce the US into paying up if Germany occupies it). -
so Britain actually gets 25+8 ipc’s each turn? (unless germany takes over middle east)
-
No, the middle east IPCs are in the income already. But if the Allies lose the middle east, then they have to make up their mind who of them pays how much. If they don’t, then Germany can appoint the payment after its gusto (usually all then has to be paid by russia).
-
@F_alk:
No, the middle east IPCs are in the income already. But if the Allies lose the middle east, then they have to make up their mind who of them pays how much. If they don’t, then Germany can appoint the payment after its gusto (usually all then has to be paid by russia).
right - that’s what i meant.
it’s already included. It’s nice in a way - gives the allies a chance to pay from whomever can afford it. (imagine this in regular A&A) -
what? the numbers for uk dont add up. You get 6 ipc’s from england and 19 from convoys :-? how exactly is the middle east added in there. And if germany takes them do you move the UK’s Ipc production conter down. cause if you do then if germany takes the middle east and all their convoys (and england still has england) then the UK is effectively reduced to -2 IPC’s :roll:
-
I believe that oil is only a liability for the allies. For when Germany takes it they get paid, and the allies write the check. They do not adjust the starting income, but pay from it.
-
I believe that oil is only a liability for the allies. For when Germany takes it they get paid, and the allies write the check. They do not adjust the starting income, but pay from it.
greatest word ever!!!
reminds me of a funny story in the gross anatomy lab . . .
:D -
i read a post a while back that as a variation, the allies would get the extra money from the middle east, this way germany would be much more likely to attack the middle east, rather than the standard stack allowing for a more interesting game. At the beginning of the game, the allies would divide the middle east up among themselves placing the appropriate country chip on each of the middle east countries. If germany takes it, the former owner has to pay. That way you wouldn’t just let give them all to russia. It would certainly help the allies out, but germany has an advantage anyway. What do you guys think of this, has anyone ever tried this?
-
never tried it before, but it does make sense. why should germnay be able to use the $$ from the middle east, but the allies can’t? this sounds like a good scenario, but wouldn’t it just tip the scales a bit too far in the allies’ direction?
-
yes, yes it would :o
-
could always equalize it by taking away allies initial bid
that way, suppose they give the middle east to usa only. Then usa get’s 8 extra ipc’s a turn, but it will take awhile before 8 usa ipc’s can counter 12 german ipc’s attacking russia.
if they give some of it to the uk, it will take less time for the uk to help russia, but germany now get’s to take away money from uk when it takes that territory. If they give it to russia, then germany get’s to take directly from russia.
In any case, it will make the territories in the middle east key since they do a triple IPC swing instead of a double.
Suggested Topics
