The case for a single UK economy

ItisILeCleric,

We are discussing the possibility of a single UK economy and if it is good or bad for Global balance, in the suggestion… the India IC would be downgraded to a minor to begin the game, however, the option to spend $20 to upgrade is still viable.

Here’s the idea…

The British economy is no longer split between London and Calcutta, instead, the United Kingdom will now collect one income for all territories owned on the map.

All IPCs must be relinquished each time an enemy power captures London, however, Calcutta is no longer a capital city, and the major IC on India has been downgraded to a minor.

Japan still receives their $5 NO for capturing Calcutta, but will not gain the UK’s IPCs. The UK may still spend $20 to upgrade the India minor IC into a major.

Krieghund, has given us a chalange to come up with the game breaking Allied strategy that makes this idea a problem… any thoughts?

@ShadowHAwk:

Well one idea would be to focus all of US vs japan and all of the UK vs Germany ( maby a little leftovers to india ) with a 55 ipc income round 1 this would be verry painfull for germany as the UK will have a fleet ready turn 2 and sea lion will be impossible.

I’m pretty sure the most the UK could spend during round 1 is 45 IPCs, they would collect around 50-53 IPC to spend for round 2 if Japan doesn’t declare war turn 1. If there’s an issue with the UK making 50+, the NO for original territories on the Europe map can be house ruled to include the whole world.

In our group games, the Allies have it tough. Japan takes all the money Islands, hammers the India production down to zero, and pushes China back to their last 3 territories using mechs from minor ICs built on the coast. Meanwhile, Japan builds a massive navy off the Philippines and taunts America to come closer so they can annihilate them, which America refuses to do because the idea of re-building a navy 6 sea zones away while the Japanese hammer the mainland is unsettling. If there is a an issue with tilting power and money, I think it would be on the Europe board, $45 from the UK + $70+ from the US would be lights out for Germany, but we have found that leaving Japan unchecked is Allied suicide. It’s much easier to dominate the Pacific with Japan than it is to dominate Europe with Germany, but something has to be done about the Moscow crush and I say the best way to do that is a D-Day landing (which have been very difficult to generate lately in our table top games). Of course there is one thing that can kill the Axis every time, and that’s a lack of proper execution, but as the Allies do you really want to place all your hopes on the Axis beating themselves?

@cyanight:

After UK drops 10 inf in London they can build another IC in West India or upgrade the minor in India as YG suggested. Then the race is on… Can UK + USA take Japan before Germany and Italy take Russia. I would suspect Japan would never have a chance vs USA at 72 and UK at 45+ and climbing. If UK can hold the DEI UK may have a comparable economy to USA. Meanwhile Japan will have to fight a strong India that does not sink when convoyed or bombed. They will have to contend with a large multi-national navy I suspect. Barring any Bovine Dice ;) I would think this would spell defeat for Japan.

Than it would finally be the Axis spending over a year at the drawing board looking for counter strategies  :-D

@cyanight:

LOL, yes it would.  I look forward to the results from your playtest game.

Thanks, I’m hoping to hear from Krieghund before then.

I can see how a kill Germany first strategy could really flip the game in favor of the Allies, however, spending $20 to turn the India minor IC into a major is not chump change.

@theROCmonster:

@Young:

I can see how a kill Germany first strategy could really flip the game in favor of the Allies, however, spending $20 to turn the India minor IC into a major is not chump change.

I don’t think Ill is talking about Kill Germany first. I think he is talking about how it devastates Japan while also being great vs Germany because UK will have a ton of guys in Middle east making it impossible to take Egypt. You let Germany do her thing, but she won’t take Moscow till T9 at the earliest because of UK air.

I don’t think you understand how much this kills Japan Grasshopper…

Perhaps not, but your earlier post suggesting how its done requires a lot of things to happen together, and some things are vague like your America spends 100% in Pacific for 4 rounds, then 100% Atlantic for the rest of the game strategy. I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m sure Japan would be in tough with a house rule like this, I’m just saying I would still like to play test it just to see Japan sweat for a change. The way I see it, it would be fun for the UK to have the flexibility, and if Krieghund drops the bomb… something else can be house ruled to counter. I respect the intrigant balance of the rules the way one effects the other, but even the problem of the American major IC in Norway got fixed with a small restriction rule added.

@ItIsILeClerc:

Perhaps you could houserule the mIC in India cannot be upgraded if need be, but there can be another one mIC in west India, ofc…

I have seen one of my opponents doing something similar by building mICs asap in Persia and Iraq (UK2 Taking Iraq, not leaving it for the Russians), possibly even in Egypt.
Spending all in the ME comes pretty close to spending all in India, with a major difference however: India can still be taken early and after that Japan still has a shot at a quick sudden death victory in the Pacific.

I was thinking more like removing the India IC altogether, that way the first minor purchased will have to be India, and if they want it to be a major they will have to spend $30 instead of $20 (that would slow down the UK a tad if the single economy idea was to powerful).

@wittmann:

I do think you need a Minor YG.

We will playtest this Sunday with the minor in India of course, but if this game mechanic proves to powerful… a small tweak like removing the Calcutta factory altogether would be an option.

@Faramir:

Make Canada a separate power. This reduces the U.K.'s income by a little.

The purpose of the proposal was to give the Allies more flexibility to deal with the latest Axis strategies, and hopefully put a scare in the way they execute those strategies. If Canada were to get their own income or if Canada, South Africa, and ANZAC came together to create a commonwealth, wouldn’t that be less flexibility? I understand trimming $6 off the UK for fear that a single economy might be to over powering, but what is Canada to do with $6. I know I get frustrated when I can’t spend a dime in India because the Islands have been captured and the IC has been hammered into the ground, but I got $6 I don’t need for Europe so I buy a tank on South Africa because I’m losing and I should get units on the board somewhere. If Canada had their own income and turn sequence, that’s just $6 I would be forced to spend in Quebec wether I like it or not. At least if I had $6 in my hand I would want the choice to build a tank on South Africa, and not be forced to place 2 infantry in Canada… might as well keep it as is.