7.0 turn 1 pics and report

OK.  :-D

It should be the same for Nat China. Szechwan falls, China can’t build no more whether they have 3 or more territories worth 3 icp’s or more.
If it’s liberated then they will get 6 icp’s and any non captured territories and can start building again.

If they have some money left and Szechwan is captured, they should have to give money to attacker. I would like to try this in a game.

The rule is as long as they have territories worth total of 3 icp’s or more, they can build and place in those territories.

thanks for the link to the rules, they will come in handy this weekend  :-P

Yep, he’s right.

For instance, even if Warsaw falls to the Germans, Polish forces in E and W Poland do not move only defend.

Italy can build the Tobruk factory and take Greece. It’s becoming the new standard move for Italy.

However Italy can’t get move their navy now until turn 3 or 4. Even then they usually go into North Africa away from the UK.

I really actually like that the UK can hurt Italy now. However, both Germany and Italy are now too weak with navy. It just puts the game out of balance in Europe now IMO. UK now controls what Germany and Italy does too early.

Of course Japan has lots of extra fun in this scenario.

i like the convoy zone optional rule, however i believe there should be a qualification that the axis still only gain the income on an actual roll of a 1.  this would represent the fact that subs can’t steal cargo, their sole goal was to destroy merchant ships not seize them.

I do have a quick question for the creators brought up while discussing the minor axis powers in another thread:

If the Germans build a naval base on Romania can the Romanians (who don’t need an IC) build ships in the Black Sea to help protect an axis fleet, or do they only produce ground/air units in their capital (not ships next to it)? Using the same principle, are they allowed to build a ftr for a German (or Italian) carrier in the Black Sea? Obviously they would have to had saved some IPCs.

I believe this next part is still under review, any word yet?

This leads me to a 2nd question, say the Germans build a minor IC in both Romania, and Bulgaria, and a NB for Bulgaria (sz43 Black Sea). I know the Germans could build ships in the Black Sea from the Bulgarian IC w/NB, but would the same NB servicing sz43 also fill the requirement to allow for ships to be built from Germany’s Romanian IC adjacent to it? Can a NB from one territory service an IC from a different territory (for ship building) as long as they share the same sz, and are owned by the same power. This is also in question if UK builds an IC for Cairo which comes w/NB servicing the Med sz47 (allows you to build ships in sz47). Can the same Cairo IC (would also be adjacent to sz64) also build ships in the Red Sea using the Upper Egypt NB that services sz64 as long as they owned both Cairo & Upper Egypt?

Further more in a similar situation as above, can a NB in a territory of your ally serve the requirements for shipbuilding for an IC you own as long as they are adjacent to the same sz? Say the Italians take Holland and build a NB (sz 16). Would the Italian NB allow the Germans to drop ships into sz 16 from their adjacent major IC in W Germany?

Very nice!!!