National Objectives vs Balance

Of all the China fixes the easiest one hasn’t been discussed yet. What about China getting one infantry for each territory controlled? No set-up or fighter rule change and it would really change the dynamic around China, even if China would be eliminated UK and Russia would really have an incentive to liberate Chinese territories to unlock that infantry production!

@Lynxes:

Of all the China fixes the easiest one hasn’t been discussed yet. What about China getting one infantry for each territory controlled? No set-up or fighter rule change and it would really change the dynamic around China, even if China would be eliminated UK and Russia would really have an incentive to liberate Chinese territories to unlock that infantry production!

Yep, this is pretty simple. Still, needs two more changes at least:

• Fighter moved to a safe spot
• Chinese forces able of move and attack any place, even soviet land (imagine if you have italians at your rear in Kazakhstan, Kuomingtan would have a good reason to fight them  :-P)

China able of move out of China is the very first change must be done, even before the fighter. It’s a rule without no reason for history (chinese forces attacked Burma Road area  :-P, and why should not be able of attack FIC?)  and no reason for balance (China is enough weak even without this needless rule)

Oh, and one more: China “colects” inf at end of her turn, not at beginning (as now it gives Japan undeserved advantage trading territories)

China “colects” inf at end of her turn

They do already.  Dont they?  :?

That one change alone would be enough, China collects Infantry at the End of her Turn would result in +1 infantry a round at least most of the time.

Remember guys, China’s not a “real” nation to be played.  The game is Germany, Italy and Japan vs England, America and Russia.  China’s just there to slow down Japan but not to give America an unfair economic advantage. (before it was American soil, but now we’re talking 12 IPC worth of ground, that’s kinda a lot of money to be giving America.)  So to prevent America from starting with 50+ (60 with NOs) they created China and made it a different nation.  It’s still slowing Japan, but it’s not giving America added power.

hell, they don’t collect IPC, they can’t build units at factories even if the Axis build one and it’s liberated, they can’t leave their own soil (except Kwangtung/Hong Kong).

We don’t need to turn China into a playable, stand alone nation.  But it does need to be buffed slightly.

Either move the fighter to Chinghai or allow China to collect infantry at the end of their round. (Or better yet, why not let China move with Russia instead of America?  That way they can move their units where they want them and it prevents Japan from having a slightly biased ability to crush China.)

@Cmdr:

Or better yet, why not let China move with Russia instead of America?  That way they can move their units where they want them and it prevents Japan from having a slightly biased ability to crush China

He, that is a good one, Mao making a coup in early 40’s and taking control of nationalist armies. I like it  :-D Ahistorical, but rebalances the game a bit in 1941 (not of great use in 1942  :|). Use “chinese” inf from AAPacific for added flavour  8-)

He, he, very good  :lol:

+1 karma  :-D

China able of move out of China is the very first change must be done, even before the fighter. It’s a rule without no reason for history (chinese forces attacked Burma Road area  tongue, and why should not be able of attack FIC?)  and no reason for balance (China is enough weak even without this needless rule)

Well, I guess the idea here is that chinese forces wouldn’t be able to retake India or launch other major operations outside of China. I think this is quite historically correct. The Burma Road wouldn’t exist if the Japanese conquered India etc and I doubt the Chinese would’ve spent forces on major operations outside of their home country.

I think the production-boost would be enough. That is, if extensive play shows an Axis advantage with NOs. Then a stronger China would divert more Japanese resources and rebalance the game. But we’re not there yet, let’s give some time to finding the best Allied strats!

Well, TG, I think you are confusing time it takes to move a fighter at some point in the game with time to move a fighter there on round 1.

Theoretically, SZ 52, SZ 51, SZ 48, SZ 57 (all easily defensible) would be ideal staging grounds for sending fighters to China.

My point is China needs that fighter NOW.  As soon as possible.  Unless you can devise a way China gets that fighter round 3, you’re better off going Australia -> India -> China.

1. China lost it’s fighter and is doing quite well because of dice.

The first half of that sentence shouldn’t even be there.  As Funcioneta said, China WILL lose their fighter turn 1.  There’s nothing they can do about it.

–—

Something we can all agree on is that the Chinese Fighter needs to moved to a safer spot.  That’s the Only way to start; everything else is secondary.

Builder_Chris,

Nope.  China collects inf during the purchase units phase

Well, I guess the idea here is that chinese forces wouldn’t be able to retake India or launch other major operations outside of China. I think this is quite historically correct. The Burma Road wouldn’t exist if the Japanese conquered India etc and I doubt the Chinese would’ve spent forces on major operations outside of their home country.

True.  Not that it ever happens, but I can’t see China liberating India or parts of Russia.  It just doesn’t feel right.

I think the production-boost would be enough. That is, if extensive play shows an Axis advantage with NOs. Then a stronger China would divert more Japanese resources and rebalance the game. But we’re not there yet, let’s give some time to finding the best Allied strats!

Sure beats the heck out of KGF.