Starting NO's and question on UK IPC Split

@shadowhawk

Easier said than done though.

Right off the bat Germany will be consistently making more money than both Britain and the Soviet Union having taken out the rest of Europe and thats before they start attacking the Soviet Union.

Keeping the income advantage really only rests on America since the only change in their income will be losing the Philippines islands, as for everybody else, they can expect their IPC count to plummet with the combined strength of the Germans and Italians.

Also, like I said, taking Rome and Berlin is on the table to accomplish, taking Tokyo however not so much since A) it’s on an island B) It’s gonna have lot’s of dudes on it and C) the Pacific is too big to build any assortment of floating bridge and would be too expensive, hence why we would end the game if Japan is limited to their home island plus maybe Korea since they’re pretty much dead in the water so there is no point in playing any further.

@Gargantua:

@Marshmallow:

but again my perspective on Sea Lion is that an early Sea Lion is a losing move under most circumstances.

Marsh

Im glad to see that your perspective has upgraded from �always a losing move� to �a losing move under most circumstances�. :)

I look forward to the day it evolves again to �under SOME circumstances� :)

:roll: :evil: :-D

The game in Seattle was very instructive.

Never mind, saw the answer on the next page.

Ah,
But the coast was not yet taken from me J3 or J4 ;-). It never completely was. If you do the math, it looks like this:

26 + 10NO’s (outer perimeter + Hawai) + 1 (Hawai) + 20 (DEI) + 2 (Phil) + 8 (China) + 9 (SE Asia) + 4 (some Russian territories) = 80 max!

Later on I lost a LOT of ground in Russia + Asia, so from turn 5 the income went down quickly… I made a start invading Australian territories and contested some SE Asian territories back and forth and my guess is that by that time the Japanese income was indeed more between 55 - 65 IPCs a turn.
Compared to the 80 - 95 IPCs Japan can collect when going all in against Asia, Russia and Middle East this is peanuts, but the latter strategy puts the Axis in a time/tempo disadvantage (IMHO ;-)).

BTW, I have to correct myself. Repeating J1 & J2 in my head today I came to the conclusion I got some numbers wrong in my lazy guesswork some days ago ;-). I’ll correct them in my previous posts.

That was precisely my thought, McLovin.  I feel, at this point in time, Germany needs a method to produce warships in the Med.  If one allows Italy to take S. France, this - essentially - means that Germany has to build a complex in Yugoslavia.  This may be a good idea in the long run anyway, making it a little easier to reinforce the south against Russia. (OOB this could be a major complex, Alpha 2 I do not think it can.)

I feel an Airbase would be nice to accompany the complex in Yugoslavia, if you go this route, since then you can put 6 fighters in the air for cover air patrol.  But again, if you have S. France, I think you would not need this. (Little harder since you have to build Italy in one zone and Germany in another instead of combined, but much cheaper.)

Slacker is right, yeah its not what we all expected but its still a great game and you should be happy with Mr. Harris taking his time to help improve the game experience. yeah its a pain to check the updates but its not all that bad. i still like both the 1940 games and the way my gaming group plays, we don’t think the OOB is totally unbalanced. yeah it needed a little work but not that much. theirs my 2 cents

Calvinhobbesliker, kcdzim and Ruanek (welcome, Ruanek!) are all correct, with one exception.  Subs may make a noncombat movement into a sea zone that contains an enemy destroyer - they just can’t continue moving after they enter such a sea zone.

Alright, thanks, thats what I figured.