The new facilities

@SSPanzer:

Yes well forgoing a J1 attack is out of the question, and giving the US 40 IPCs up front is a bid, which is not optional on this forum. The question posed is objectives, our group prefers to give a few bonus objectives here and there, so if you would like to contribute please address the topic at hand.

Well, the option I mentioned simply allows the US to use their wartime NO right away in the case of a J1 DoW, which is not technically a bid since there would be no placement of units beforehand, it just gives the US 57 IPCs to spend on their first turn instead of the OOB 17; leaving the rest of the game untouched.

I mentioned it since your second US NO gives the US extra IPCs but basically increases the OOB US NO from 40 to 45; which, as Tralis stated, doesn’t do much for the US as they can’t really build much more with 5 extra IPCs per turn besides accumulating it for later use anyway as the US needs boats and planes to contest Japan on the water and actually get their land units in range of anything.

The Chinese NO is significant for China, but I don’t think that’s necessarily bad as China still does relatively poorly against Japan.  The UK NO would allow for 1 extra infantry per turn for UK, which will also be further annoying to Japan.  However, I voted that it will help the Allies, but not much because with the J3 India Crush method, 2 extra infantry to India will not make that much of a difference, and the couple extra infantry that China can accumulate will still only delay the Japanese a little.

sorry. should point out that he has at least 7 bombers by end of round 4 unless I attack J1, then he has 8.  I might just try and put alot of pressure on Hawaii in our next game…force him to have to buy more ships off the start instead of the 2 bombers.

Or I will have to try an amphibious assault on Queensland.  Not easy considering he has all the ANZAC fighters and infantry on their.  But doing that takes away from capturing the DEI…I usually fall back and take the DEI, thats where the money is.  Taking AUST doesn’t reward the Japanese player economically!!

@Gargantua:

I have to give Krieghund an AMEN here.  He is one of the ONLY people involved in the game creation, who is reaching out to fans, to try and help them out, and support a product that was at some point improperly managed and sent to consumers.  Atleast HE is standing by HIS contribution to the product.

Thanks, but I’m just the “point man”.  Larry and WotC are behind this errata effort 100%, otherwise I wouldn’t be allowed to do it.

I started a new thread so with all of the finished charts bundled into one pack along with screenshots of the finished product. This thread was getting a bit too long and i was concerned that it would be hard to find the latest versions of my charts. The versions of my charts in this form will be deleted in the coming days so check out the new thread.  Thanks for all the help and suggestions.

I will do the same:

Since I’m the one that pointed out a lot of threads were ending in WOTC bashing with no real plan of action, I feel I should comment.

I support what MaherC is saying here. I didn’t have to resort to calling to get my tacs, but apparently the rest of us do. I’ve had multiple cases of having to ask for defective or missing pieces to be replaced by WOTC so maybe that’s why I was treated differently, I don’t know. I’m glad to see we are starting to take a united stand on what we believe in:

1. The game did not live up to previous PRODUCTION standards.
2. We don’t blame Krieg or Larry for PRODUCTION problems.
3. We need to continue to support each other to help maintain the standard we expect from WOTC in the games we buy and play.

Kreig, Larry, and the others are hard at work sorting this out. We must have faith in them that we will get the game back to what Larry wanted it to be. Remember, this isn’t some video game you’ll be bored with next week. We all bought this as an intellectual investment to enjoy for years. And we will if we just give them the time to work out the details of the new problems that have come up. In the meantime, I too believe the focus should be on the tangible quality problems that WOTC has caused in production and leave the rules stuff to sorted out correctly, not quickly.

Info is all here for a new battlestrip:

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2115

@Krieghund:

The FAQ has been updated with a clarification on New Hebrides.  It is treated in the same way as FIC.

Makes sense for game purposes considering the way it is marked on the map board.  :-)

[Although I think historically it was jointly administered with the UK… I think.]

@Tralis:

I’m just using the old Pacific chart. Kamikaze slider… goes up very high… its working pretty well. The VP track of course isn’t used.

Good idea, I have the original AAP but I’ll probably just soldier on with the chart they gave us for this game. What really pisses me off is the battle board, some units aren’t on there and then some are there that shouldn’t be!