7.0 Clarification

my gaming buddy brought this up. can the Japanese  sneak attack be used on the country that it is already at war with?  or is it only to attack a country like the US to bring them into the war?

They must not be at war with the country having the sneak attack used on them. Which kind of sucks as, if you want to use it on the Commonwealth, you have to do it by turn 3 as they are at war with Japan on that turn.

@koba:

They must not be at war with the country having the sneak attack used on them. Which kind of sucks as, if you want to use it on the Commonwealth, you have to do it by turn 3 as they are at war with Japan on that turn.

I thought so.  thanks

@SS:

@Tigerman77:

Im wotking on the discrepancies right now.  This is what im changing for the 7.1v

1 Russia starting cash will be 15. Russia will receive full production income every turn but still have to roll to get to 48 for a declaration of war.

So what Tigermans saying is 48 icp’s Russia gets after turn 1 and every turn  and roll 2d12’s and the die roll is a 6 , 10. So that 16 goes toward the declaration of war total? Why not just have Russia roll 2 die for income until they get to 48 instead of gettin 48 icp’s every turn.

If it is too much income for Russia ill have to balance it another way.

Maybe starting cash 48 instead of 15. Then Russia tolls 2d12 for production and war entry.

What is the status of Eastern Poland and the Baltic states according to the Soviet-Nazi Non-Aggression pact?

Both of these areas should be occupied by Russia as part of this pact but neither put up much of a fight when the Soviets invaded. However in the game they are garrisoned by a handful of infantry which technically turn UK. We played that the pieces are eliminated at the end of any player turn where the Axis controls Warsaw. Control was transferred to the Russian.

How is the Russian half of the of the Non-aggression pact enforced?

When the Minor Factory in Calcutta is upgraded to a  Major Factory does it just produce 5 units with capital ships or 8 units with no capital ships and with the first 3 pieces bought have to be infrantry?

HI Bill,

My group will not be playing until this weekend. I’ll make a report on this forum during/after that. We’ll be playing with the 7.1 rules as set out by tigerman and see how it goes with Russia

Have game on the 28th. I’m going to play with Russia getting 48 icp’s to start with and have them roll 2d12’s at the end of turn 1 for income starting at 0.
Japan sneak attack be used by turn of 7.
Germany gets naval 2nd impluse.

But also will be waiting for Koba’s game results.

When the minor complex in India becomes a major complex does it just produce 5 pieces with capital ships with no first infrantry buy? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :?

Same question for Anzac. :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :?

If ANZAC and DEC upgrade their IC’s to major then they would ho from 6 units per turn, first 3 being infantty, and no capitol ships to 10 units per turn, first 3 being infantry, and can produce capital ships.

That’s how my group decided we were going to ply it this weekend .

Thanks Tigerman.

Yeah,

We didn’t even bother with the 48 per Turn Russian income. We set them up with the new pieces but still made them roll for their income. What you are describing is exactly what we predicted would happen.

80 ipc in the begining allows russia to attack japan, and win. China is to hard to defeat.

Russia is dangerous in this one; thought the way my opponents are playing this one it would be hard to believe. It’s a long way to Moscow though and I think the “happy times” will be over soon enough.

The reinforcements and new IC in Stalingrad make life a lot more difficult for the Axis. As Japan, I didn’t try to provoke her.