Oh, awesome. We thought you had to own the base. That actually makes a lot more sense as far as realism goes.
When powers without capitals capture each others territories.
-
By virtue of a crack performance by British forces in North Africa to drive Italy off the continent, the three French troops made a long march to Persia as the Brit’s worked up the Caucasus. After an all or nothing attack by the British on Germany’s main army group at Volgograd (destroying all but one fighter and loosing all in the gambit), the French blocking forces are now able to seize Kazakhstan.
That is where my brain got stuck between gears, as neither France, nor Russia control their respective capitals.
You may understand the question coming, and I may know the answer, but appreciate any feedback as I’ve viewed but never join this forum for years until today.
Question: Does the territory become French?
My analysis says, yes.Question behind the question: Is it tactically sound to do so?
My analysis says, no. Since the French cannot collect IPC, it would be wiser to let the British capture it, to get the IPC gain which can be delivered to the battlefield in a turns time.Thoughts, feelings, and many musings appreciated!
-
@SeaYa Yes, the territory would be controlled by France. You are also correct that France would be unable to collect the income, so you may be better off having another Allied power capture it, if possible.
-
Thanks WarDog @Krieghund !
I haven’t been able to post a map picture, but after thinking about it more, additional context of the German army disposition in nearby territories could impact the decision as well, as they would be the next power in theater to move. If France taking Kaz’ would prevent any armored and mechanized forces from Novosibirsk moving through Kaz’ into the Caucasus, it may be woth sacrificing the 1 IPC income to prevent Germany from securing a 5 IPC bonus. Always multiple points of context to consider, which makes for a very rich gameplay.
Suggested Topics
