Another things I just thought of. If China is ignored for a while, it provides safe haven for Russian units or Allied aircraft to land in Chinese territories and mount attacks (or threaten to attack) in spaces they would not normally be able to use.
China is not like sending forces to Australia (where once they land it takes a while to get back to the front). The forces roll on and take ground (making it a worthy endevour in my opinion).
Do China!
Also consider for a moment you are really discussing probability instead of odds (which are often interchanged despite they are different).
Probaility will give you a percentage of how often the event will occur given infinite rolls (example 16.67%). Odds will deal with possible chances for an event happening versus changes against. (example 1 in 6).
If you have 6 infantry attacking, you can expect 1 to hit for the 6 rolls but only use it as a guide line for you are rolling 6 dice one, not infinite times.
Another point to consider is the possible deviation (something I call the “wild”). It is the possibility of how many additional hits you might achieve. Example: The odds of 6 infantry attacking 2 armor will yield the same odds however, it is far more likely for the infantry to score many (a max possibility of 6) hits versus the armor (a max possibility of 2). This becomes especially poignant in larger battles.
I have played long enough to see the craziest outcomes that could not be repeated in over 100,000 rolls. Also consider it is your roll against their roll so the outcomes increase dramatically.
Going through China is the perfect drain for Russia (almost better than the German front). Russia has to send forces to defend against Japan (meaning they are not going against Germany) and there are many spaces in China to defend so Russia can never go too deep into China. Russia (or the Allies) do not earn income in China so they gain nothing by fighting there.
No where else on the map is the combat more if a total loss for Russia than in China.
It was used against me in the Baltic, and unfortunately hit and sunk a ship.
It can also be used to stop a National Objective in the Western Med if necessary. Chances are good the Italian Fleet (if it is still around) will not enter the Western Med fearing the British and/or American Fleet.
In short, the sub is used to fill in any gaps.
Although I recognize those players who believe it is totally useless and they can start without it at the beginning of the game if they prefer.
Ah, and the India IC means Japanese IC’s on East Indies and Borneo. Which also means Japan doesn’t have to spend for one on India.
Which also means for England to support the India IC, Germany gets a free ride all the way to Moscow.
I personally welcome the India IC, but that is just me.
The G2 smash is a reason why I do not go for the Ukraine on turn 1.
I keep enough armor in play that can get to Karelia if necessary. That move typically forces the Russian player to withdraw his units (from Karelia) leaving only an infantry or two to deal with.
What this does is allows Germany to take Karelia with a minor group that won’t get trapped in the north.
Anytime you can take a territory with minimal force (which also means minimal loss) it is a strategic victory.
ok, I got it.
I didn’t realize you were modifying all nations abilities.
Another possibility is to keep bombers at the price of 12 but you could pay each time a bomber wanted to use their extra hit (say 3 IPC’s). You won’t have to worry about an extra marker for super bombers.
Just pay 3 IPC’s for each usage of the extra die roll you wish to inflict (combat or SBR) purchase during the purchase units phase.
ah, best ball (golf is sometimes played as you suggested with the SBR dice).
I do not like Technology much. I believe it to be game breaking. Broken if you never roll technology, broken if you roll a poor technology, and broken if you get a superior technology (like heavy bombers)
Why not roll dice at the beginning of the game to see who wins(highest roll wins)? After that, play the game without technology.
I don’t mean to be sarcastic but it seems that is what technology is, a gamble hoping to turn the coarse of the game with zero strategy.
The issue I see with such an agressive first turn is the burn rate of infantry and inability to hold ground.
From those first moves I would set the US and British builds to prepare for a big invasion on turn 3. The resources necessary to stop/hold the invasion would eat into the majority of German builds meaning the East would be starved of support. The natural result would be the Russians getting the +10 IPC’s for taking German soil.
In short, I believe the same (well, near same) can be acheived by taking a more conservative approach while not losing as many units and holding back the Red Hoardes.
I could be wrong, but that is how I see it.
The Brazil IC is an economic trap. Consider the complex costs 15 and the transport is 7, making the total is 22 IPC’s. The exact same effect can be achieved shucking from Eastern Canada with 2 tranports (1 transport each way) for only 14 IPC’s. The actual liability issue is up for debate but since the Allies would make a big deal of Brazil, I would make it a big deal as the Axis (in the form of a Bomber threat against the transport). The Allies would then be forced to build more fleet to counter the bombers and the economic mismatch grows further.
Personally, I vote down on the IC in Brazil but I imagine there might be an exception for it eventually.