France and Sea Zone 93/112

Thank you for the clarification

What I was talking about is that Russia has more muscle in this set-up then in G40. They can be more aggressive and can help defend the Chinese wall and/or the Middle east against the Japanese once India falls (things they don’t get to do much in G40).

@WILD:

@knp7765:

This is why we modified the Russian NO with our own house rule……

I know this is out of place, but the Russian NO is very much part of an over all Med strat….(one that shouldn’t exist IMO).

Yea, the 3 IPC bonus the Russians get for Italian African territories, and Med islands is ridiculous (it has been a major gripe sense it was introduced). This theater was never a realistic or historic goal for the Russians, and it is exploited way to much as ppl get more familiar with it. This NO was changed partially to boost the Russians if there is a Sea Lion (kinda like a penalty), but now it is being manipulated even w/o Sea Lion.

IMO Finland, The Balkans, The Mid East, and Eastern Europe (Orig German territories) are a realistic goal. I’l even buy Original Italian possession in Europe like Albania, parts of N Italy and maybe even Rome could also be added to the list (but the Americans beat them to it for the most part).

What we are experimenting with (not an original house rule by any means) is that Russia gets a bonus for any Orig German, Orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral , and Pro Allied Neutral territory that Russia is in control of equal to that territories IPC value (could also include True Neutrals activated by the Axis, or liberated by Russia from the Axis). This makes the Italian Med islands worthless, and Libya/Ethiopia hardly worth going after. It will tone down some territory bonuses for the Russians (like Bulgaria), but allows them some new territories to target as well that were more in tune with their goals IMO.

Obviously Finland was a major goal, but so was the Balkans (Bulgaria, Yugo, Romania, maybe Albania, and Greece) especially once they beat back the Germans (like in a Sea Lion attempt, or a failed assault on Moscow). In The Mid East it still allows the Russians to gain NO bonus for control of Iraq (reduced), and now Persia for added income once at war (could be as late as R4 before they could be in either because they have to pause in NW Persia). The NO bonus for Iraq, and Persia could also simulate the lend lease coming up through the Persian Gulf. I know that Persia being Russian isn’t very historical as it was British controlled (Russia did invade what is NW Persia though). My thinking here is that if the UK doesn’t take Persia early (leaving it for Russia), then the Allies are out some English Pounds and a couple of inf needed early on. If Germany does a G3 Barbarossa, then by time Russia gets to Persia it would be Rus4 (6 or more IPCs lost to England if they activated it UK1). It would be a viable target however for the Russians to Liberate Persia from the Axis after going for the Oil Bonus, to get a bonus of their own).

In the event of a Sea Lion (or failed assault on Moscow), the Russians would still get good bonuses for the orig German, orig Italian, Pro Axis Neutral, and now some Pro allied Neutral territories in the Balkans & Mid East (average of 2-3 IPCs each). If they crack into Northern Italy, or Greater German territories then their NO bonuses rise even more.

The med island thing is no big deal, since 1 axis plane in SITA stops any russian landing.  But, I do like the NO changes you proposed.  It should only affect Original axis in Europe, and all neutrals in Europe/Middle-East. (No islands).

Also, from a penalty standpoint, there’s no reason for Russia not to declare war on Japan on R1.  Declaring war doesn’t require them to make an actual attack, but it does open their territories up for friendly occupation, making it that much more obnoxious as a US bomber base.

Carrier planes are always defending in the air, no matter what type of units are attacking.

@jeffdestroyer:

if AB and NB stop the blitz, then there will be no blitzing in W. Europe.  All of the TT have something.

Except Holland

By the way, this sealion airstrike scenario is also the reason why Britain starts out with a mech.  It can go to Eireland and back to London in time for the invasion.

@Dark_Destroyer:

The Russian player needs a destroyer to lift you from the convoy zone because you have a sub there.  Submerged sub in a convoy zone works.

“Submerging” is a term that can occur only in a battle as an option for Submarines to “retreat” while remaining in place.  After the battle is over, they are no longer considered “submerged”.  “Submerging” has no bearing at all in any other turn phase.

In addition, if you have any warship in a convoy zone during the collect income phase of the enemy’s turn (that controls territories adjacent to the convoy zone) they deduct their income REGARDLESS of whether they, or ANY another ally, have ships in that zone.  Japan could, for example, mobilize as many ships as they wanted in seazone 6 but it would NOT prevent convoy interdiction if an Allied power had ships in that space.