Operation Sealion a Possibility with AA1940 Europe?

And by page 4 this thread has completely fallen off the rails…

Back to Sealion.

The gov’t in exile rule sounds to me like a must have, considering Sealion (on a probablity scale compared to prior editions) appears to be a more viable option.

However, the exile rule should probably be limited to major nations (which excludes France, China, etc.) that start the war as transcontinental powers (which excludes Germany, Japan, and Italy) as in theory they’re the nations most likely to have potential centers of power farthest away from their capital and therefore independently capable of continuing on with the fight.

That would essentially mean only UK, US and USSR have the option to establish governments in exile, which as previous posters have mentioned, would likely be either a center of production still in their control - or - a fixed location, which if already captured would negate the exile.

Is this historically accurate?  No.  Clearly France and Italy both established governments in exile (Free French and Mussolini in Northern Italy).  But as other posters have noted, historical accuracy and balance dont necessarily go hand-in-hand with a boardgame.

Where any fixed locations would be, would be fun to consider.   For the US it would almost certainly be the west coast.  For the USSR perhaps somewhere beyond the Urals. And for the UK, probably eastern Canada.

I also like the reduced IPC capture for any nation that has an exile option.

But ultimately, these kinds of rules may be too cumbersome to include in the official rules, and are best left as alternate rules or interesting house rules.

All you have to do is exclude the rule about giving up your money when your capital is taken. Just produce pieces at any one of your other factories and if you have none then build them with the money that you kept. It’s that simple.

I cant disagree more. You only want thr rich nations to establish government in exile. When clearly the two you DONT want are the ones that actually established one. If america is taken out the game is over. If russia is taken out pack it in mate. The germans can overwhelm England (eventually)

@idk_iam_swiss:

I cant disagree more. You only want thr rich nations to establish government in exile. When clearly the two you DONT want are the ones that actually established one. If america is taken out the game is over. If russia is taken out pack it in mate. The germans can overwhelm England (eventually)

You’ll need to elaborate on this one a little. I am not sure what you are disagreeing about.

Oh, the suggestion was a “government in exile rule” I reeeally dont think it should apply to any allied armies. Mostly America or russia.

It could be anywhere you still have a factory

Couldn’t this be abused?  If I know the capital is going to fall, wouldn’t I buy a factory and place it somewhere?

@Brain:

It could be anywhere you still have a factory

@gtg21:

However, the exile rule should probably be limited to major nations (which excludes France, China, etc.)

Wait!… did someone refer to France as a major power???
no way!
wow…
phew, had to read it again…
thought we had lost all sense of reality.

I don’t think we have to see the concept as exiled to the extreme with this.  If Moscow fell, they could move to Caucasus.  It’s not like the Soviets didn’t move their industry to the East as the Germans advanced or that Hitler’s generals had plans to fall back into the mountains and hold out as long as possible if they could have only convinced him to keep fighting and not commit suicide.
 oh wait, he might not have done that after all.  he’s actually going to enjoy those 2016 Olympics in Rio.  Now that’s an exile.

While powers could move across continents, they could more likely move to the next territory.  That may only buy them one more turn, but it’s something.

This is not abuse you will lose the value of your capital and the ability to produce so many pieces in that territory, You will also have to spend 15 ipc to purchase the factory. And finally, you will not have as much production in your new territory.

if you move it to another territory with a major IC, I believe it will have the same production ability and saves the 30 ipcs…

I gotta get used to these new rules

Thank you LuckyDay!

New rules, new complexity.

@LuckyDay:

if you move it to another territory with a major IC, I believe it will have the same production ability and saves the 30 ipcs…

Either way you should still keep your money if your capital is taken.

Ugh, I hate that rule I never play with it…Do you guys play with that rule?

no we never play with houserules

None? my grandparents ONLY play if I include the paratrooper house rule. and I always ignore that rule that you lose all your money if a victory city is taken.

Hey guys, here is an end to all of this: eliminate capitols, only have victory cities! As long as a country has an industrial complex then they are still in the fight. So for Russia for instance, if Moscow is taken, if they have a factory in Siberia they can still fight. You don’t lose any money, but you lose the IPC value, which Moscow would be a lot of value (probably at least 5-10 IPC’s). I think what you guys are forgetting is that you can’t just place an IC wherever, according to LH the territory you place it in must have a minimum IPC value and the IC can only produce 3 units max, or 10 depending on what type of IC you bought. So you as a country are defeated when you lose all your IC’s. You can still move troops and all that but you cannot build, effectively eliminating you.

Thats typically how we roll…However buying a factory and putting it east of japan implies that you are counting on losing. that 15 IPC spent on the factory can be spent saving russia.

East of Japan is the Pacific Ocean. Where does Russia place a factory east of Japan?