Dear Mike,
Some interesting suggestions.
1. Bridging between SFE and Alaska is definitely plausible, however, it may have other strategic consequences. For example, USA can threaten invasion of SFE (as well as any navy) from WCO SZ in 1 turn.
The counter side is that a Japanese navy stationed in SFE SZ is threatening to (a) bridge to alaska, and (b) invade WCAN, © invade WUS.
Could make for an interesting Pacific scuffle maybe?
2. Buy the board game (there already is a line there). Quite why the map doesn’t show one is strange though - maybe it could be updated?
3. If American fighters can’t cross the Atlantic without a UK carrier to land on, UK is effectively forced into buying a carrier in UKT1/UKT2. This will cut out a lot of dynamic play (IND/SA IC).
I think the proposed Sea Zone would allow transatlantic flights from ECAN to UK/FIN, which as you say might be more realistic.
The danger is that if US can’t “shuck shuck”, and need 2 turns to transport their men, does that delay the US too much in Europe? In some games I have played, even one turn’s difference is critical in deciding whether Moscow or Germany will fall.
Anyway - some ideas for you to kick around. I suggest you try the new map changes, and compete in the relevent theatre for each change (US goes Pacific for number 1, Germany/Jap focus on Russia ASAP for change 3), and see what they play like.
[ This Message was edited by: Desert_Viper on 2002-04-24 13:40 ]