U.K 2 Economies Question

Welcome to the forum Jman.

True, I did not mean to say that one bad-luck battle increases your odds of a future good-luck battle. What I meant is that Global 1940 is a much bigger game than, say, Revised. Global has more units involved and more battles that matter. The effect of having more units and more battles is to soften the effect of any one unit missing or of any one battle going poorly. In other words, as you broaden your sample size, you get closer to achieving average results in the aggregate.

thanx for clearing that up for me

I thought they had to be at war with japan too

I see the logic now that uk and dutch are at war with germany makes them buddies

At the end of each power’s turn they check to see if there are any enemy warships in convoy zones that border territories controlled by the power in question.  So, in your example, at the end of Italy’s turn, they would deduct up to 2 IPC from their income for the US sub present in z97.  They cannot lose more income than the total value of territories that Italy controls that border z97.  If Italy is under Allies control, the convoy disruption is irrelevant, because Italy does not collect income while it is enemy-controlled.  And the new controller would not lose income to a friendly unit (the US sub).

Then, on Germany’s turn, they would lose up to 2 IPC income for the US sub in z97.  Again, they can’t lose more than the total value of German controlled territories bordering z97.

So, essentially, the US sub is doing convoy disruption to BOTH Italy and Germany as long as they both control territories that border z97.

he is including the money from siberia which is correct in the global game.  Also russia and the United States do not recieve their NO unless they are at war with a major power ie germany italy or japan.

all 3.  REALLY sure NO

tell nutbar to play by alpha 2

Thank you.