What happens to an Industrial Complex when China takes it over?

@Soviet-Steamroller That is correct.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@NoMercy:

It’s great that the Axis can try all these crazy strategies and likely succeed against Allies who haven’t seen them before; I just wish the Allies could do similar things…I find it a bit unfair that the Axis get to have all the fun.

I think that is just the way the game is, the Axis are the “aggressor” and need to attack to win; while the allies are the defender and need to react to the situations while keeping the big picture in mind. I think the allies are a lot of fun as well; with the UK being a lot of fun and involved everywhere and very important to the overall allied success.

Hmm nerquen, this sounds interesting since it has something to it.
Combining a landing reenforcing and sustaining method to it.

Yeah, you are probably right about the islands.
I understand what you are getting at about Germany being able to put a Major IC in Norway. I have never put a Major up there, but I have put Minors in Norway before.
The rule states that to place a Major IC, the territory has to be worth 3 or more IPCs and be one of your nation’s original territories. One possible solution would be to use HBG’s 1939 variant map. I think you could still set it up to play 1940 and the only original German territories would actually be IN Germany itself. They couldn’t even place a Major in Romania.

@Larrie:

@Cow:

Siam and French indo china… may the chinese attack it? I do not see a national symbol there or an exception to the rule there. So I kind of just assumed china can’t hit it.

If you check the Pacific rulebook it states that the only two tt’s that China can attack, outside of China of course, are Burma and Kwangtung.

What Larry said, and to be very clear, that has never changed in the Alpha revisions.

@knp7765:

I would also add it’s kind of a silly thing for UK/ANZAC to do.

No doubt. especially as the OP was proposing landing UK planes (not enough of those) in a territory with no fodder defense.

If the UK ever lays out a delicious snack like their precious India fighters and the only cost will be a 10 IPC national objective and some japanese fodder infantry…  snarf.

I see what you’re trying to do with these ideas, but you need to be careful or you’ll make the US-China partnership in the game become a penility for the US which wouldnt be fair. Ideas I have heard have been to do things like;

If the burma road is open allow the US to replace the Chinese fighter if it gets destroyed.
If the burma road is open AND the US is at war allow them to purchase 1 unit for the Chinese per turn.

I like both of these and would better represent the US’s support to the Chinese, and also the importance of the Buram road. The second idea would need to be limited to land and air units only (obviously) but to have no more then 1 of each non-infantry/arty unit type (no more then 1 fighter, tatical bobmber, tank, mech infantry, ect…)

The problem with that is if the US took Manchuria, it would revert to Chinese control so the US would not be able to use a factory there or even build one itself.  Also, US would not get the 3 IPCs for Manchuria either. 
However, USA could take Korea and put a minor there.