Why mech from Germany and Romania? Wouldn’t you want to be able to build Infantry closer to Russia, and then tanks/mech from West Germany?

Or are you replacing infantry buys with mech buys?

I’ve noticed that many people seem to think that allowing Italy to take France greatly hampers Germany’s war effort. I used to agree with this opinion, then I started to daydream….

If Germany “Hit and Runned” France, then Italy took it, let’s look at the benefits and losses incurred by doing such an attack.

Benefits:
Italy gets 27 (probably more) IPCs on it’s next turn.
More income means Italy gets through Egypt and into Russia faster.
More pressure on Russia from south means Russia must move troops slightly out of position.
A stronger Italy delays the Italy Crush that America and Britain will likely try.
A stronger Italy means a weaker Britain and a more sweaty Russia.
Sealion is still possible, and frankly you’ll have your war machines in West German after the retreat, so it’s okay.

Losses:
A smaller 2nd turn German Buy, around 37 IPCs (with Finland, Normandy/Bordeaux, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia ((<-- unless you strafe to Romania, though at that point you’re being a bit TOO nice to Italy xD)) . This means less versatility in German purchases (which I know lots of people enjoy)
A more difficult push into Russia for Germany. (Will eventually be eased by Italy, but not for a while)
Loss of an IC in France. (I imagine Italy wouldn’t be able to drop as much defence as Germany in the case of Overlord.)

That’s all I can think of right now.

Anyways, I’m just wondering has anyone tried out the Italian France, and how has it worked?
Also, why not give it a try? Any feedback is appreciated.

I’ve seen a great deal of posts where people have discussed the merits (or folly) of letting Italy take France after a German hit and run (or two). I’m just wondering how Italy can do this? As far as I can tell, Northern Italy borders Southern France, and France proper is two spaces away. So how could one even go about doing this, nevermind it being smart or not?

Maybe I’m just blind or something, but either way I’d appreciate an explanation. ;D

If I might make a casual observation, it seems to me that LHPC (Larry Harris Pacific Changes, lol feel free to make fun of that name) have caused Japan to have a more desperate war than OOB. It seems that Victory is still possible, but now, like original Pacific, requires more calculated moves, and for one to make the most usage of their units. Having played with LHPC, I found it much more desperate and sometimes even felt like it was almost historical in it’s difficulty. Well, not entirely, but I think you catch my drift.

And if all that is true, then it looks like they’ve done their job. It doesn’t make Japan’s job impossible (as we’ve seen), just more difficult, which is ideal, cause OOB was simply ridiculous. I fully support the current changes, but I wouldn’t mind slightly more.

That’s just me though. I’m interested to see your opinions on LHPC.

Also, has anyone playtested the new setup with Global?

Hey, I’m an LTRFTW (Long Time Reader, First Time Writer).

I’ve only had the pleasure of playing Pacific, but I own Europe as well.

My question is, what’s the best way to go about pushing into Russia? There seems to be a great deal of debate on this topic, so I’d like to know what the best way to push east is in this game.

On a side note, does India still get killed early (maybe not turn 3) by Japan? Or has global changed that, like some speculated it would?