** As I’ve said often, the Europe side is mostly balanced, provided that the Pacific side is returned to balance. If Japan is going to be left as crippled as it is, then Germany/Italy need a significant increase in power so as to put the screws to Russia and England…
The basic concept in each plan (except the last, of course) is to nullify the massive American income. America earns twice what any other nation earns, three or four times some nations and six or seven times other nations. Allowing them to spend it all in one theater of operations (Pacific or Atlantic) unbalances things. (More so in the Pacific, hence why you see virutally every game where the board is littered in American flags all over the Pacific.) To do this one must:
a) Increase the offensive capabilities of the European Axis Powers
b) Increase the income of Japan significantly (10 IPC a round, in a manner that cannot be taken from them regardless of what the Allies can do)
c) Restore Japan’s units that were lost in the changes which would allow them the ability to “burst” and attack many targets earlier in the game, forcing the allies to have to think and apply strategy
d) Simply requiring America to act like England, spending part of their income in both hemispheres initially. (It is still possible to move units from one side to the other, but it takes time to move stuff, time Japan has to build.)
or
e) One not suggested above, reduce W. USA and India’s industrial complexes to minor complexes and forbid their upgrades, thus reducing the number of units that can be employed against the Japanese until later in the game.
Ok Jen, I can understand what you are saying:
By the way I will put your post on Larry’s site since you are a bull-headed lazy butt to make your own profile. I’m only doing this because you are experienced and make some good points…
Anyway, I can tell you right now Larry won’t do “D”. He’s already talked about this before. No way he’s splitting the income like England- so that’s out.
“C” is not happening either- those million fighters were way too easy for Japan to use. If you are going to beef up Japan it is going to be through land units only- infantry probably- anything else makes Japan too strong.
Since you and others agree that its the Pacific side that needs help, then “A” will not happen either. That theater is really touchy. Its very hard to beef up Axis in Europe w/o tipping the scales quickly to their side.
“E” is not popular with Larry either.
Your only real chance is “B”.
Plan B: French Indo-China
- FIC yields 10 IPC until it is controlled by England, Russia, Australia or America. This means that Japan will probably have that NO for the entire game.
** Justification 1: Japan’s already in a financial hole that feels like a bottomless pit.
** Justification 2: Japan already has to divide her fleet to cover America, Australia and Japan.
** Justification 3: This 10 IPC bump would give Japan 1 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Armor or 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery a round to put against China. If you figure China earns 9+6, then Japan’s 10 IPC (2/3rds) should be enought to “hold the line” recquiring England to put an effort into China.
B is probably the best bet- I like your French Indo-China NO. It is the easiest to implement w/o immediately disrupting the setup in the region- yet it gets Japan what it needs.
Question on your proposed Frindo NO- as the Alpha +2 stands Japan cannot take Frindo otherwise it would be a declaration of war and they would lose their bonus 10 bucks for not being at war with US/Allies.
I’m assuming you want to make Frindo an exception to this rule- Japan attacking Frindo does NOT make it a DOW and then add your Frindo rule to the Alpha+2 setup right???
Also, if Japan take control and Allies takes back, can Japan retake and REGAIN/REACTIVATE the Frindo NO again for themselves??? Type out a cleaner version of this NO please.
…and Jen for what its worth, thanks for your observations, I’ll make sure your voice is heard. :-)