I think you’ve got it. Just to clarify, for America to collect income for a Russian territory, America must liberate the territory from an Axis power. If Russia retains control of a territory and Moscow is Axis-held, nobody collects for it until an Axis power takes that territory.
A discussion on Russia's National Advantages
-
I’ll be doing a thread for each, after we iron out how LHTR NAs for Russia actually work as written. There’s a lot of grey area that needs to be made black and white.
Anyway, please refrain from AARe. The NAs are very detailed there, but they also include a lot of perks that are not listed in the LHTR NA’s. But yes, I agree, they are a lot more clear cut and much better then the standard ones.
Also Aretaku, note that in LHTR you can only lend-lease one GROUND unit from England and one GROUND unit from America. That means you cannot convert fighters. It’s a huge, unneeded nerf to the national advantage as far as I’m concerned.
Anyway, I think we should work on Mobile Industry first, since that’s very easy to abuse.
According to LHTR Mobile Industry is written as such:
Your industrial complexes each may move 1 territory during your noncombat move phase. It may be used in the same turn to place units (up to a maximum of the new territory’s value). They cannot move during the combat move phase. If an opponent captures them, that oppionent cannot move them. You may mobilize at a complex if you controlled both the industrial complex and it’s new territory at the start of your turn.
To me that makes it seem like you treat Industrial Complexes as AA Guns under this rule. That would mean you can load them on transports, you can move them into Russian controlled enemy territories, you can stack them together like AA Guns, etc. The only difference being that the complexes revert to normal complexes when captured by the enemy. (And allegedly their complexes become mobile if Russia captures them.)
Anyone disagree with this interpretation?
-
1. They can be moved on land (TRN’s do not allow IC’s to be carried on them, therefore they cannot be moved by TRNs).
2. Yes, you can put more than 1 IC in the same territory, but the build limit is still the value of the territory
3. Yes, you can move them into Russian Controlled territories, since those territories ARE RED once Russia controls them. -
@ncscswitch:
1. They can be moved on land (TRN’s do not allow IC’s to be carried on them, therefore they cannot be moved by TRNs).
2. Yes, you can put more than 1 IC in the same territory, but the build limit is still the value of the territory
3. Yes, you can move them into Russian Controlled territories, since those territories ARE RED once Russia controls them.Points two and three directly oppose the opinions of AAMC JAG Blackwatch who has determined that the complexes MUST be on Red Territories and there can be only one per territory.
Honestly, I think you’re correct and that’s how I read the rules myself.
However, as to point one, I’d say the complex can be loaded on a transport fleet, just like an AA Gun. The National Advantage is, in effect, turning them into AA Gun units.
Why would you put them on a transport? Transports cannot be captured, only sunk.
Of course, the other idea is to walk the complex back to SFE or Yakut so when captured, it produces one unit per round. (Prolly an okay idea if Japan/Germany is only coming at you from Caucasus/Kazakh and you can literally leave your capitol behind!)
-
I want to see the WWII era TRN that can be used to transport steel mill components :-P
The only ADVANTAGE of Mobile Industry for Russia is to be able to push the IC FORWARD as they push Germany out of Ukraine. Otherwise it is a really crappy defensive move that only serves to delay the inevitable seizure of your IC and reduce enemy build rates once captured. And anyone who has played with TripleA knows that, once you capture territory with Russia, it turns RED :-) “Flags” are simply a means to represent this on a game board that is pre-printed and cannot change color.
By Blackwatch’s reasoning, I could theoretically move an IC into Japan controlled Yakut, since by his reasoning Yakut is a RED territory, regardless of who has a “flag” there. 8-)
Allowing Russia to stack both IC’s in Moscow makes sense. Since that is what they actually did… consolidated their industry into a much smaller territory further away from the advancing Germans. If you still limit the production value to the territory value, there is no reason to not allow the IC to share a territory with another IC.
Being able to do both of those (put both in Moscow, or push the IC forward into Ukraine) might actually make Mobile Industry worth having. But under Blackwatch’s version of it… it is almost completely worthless… almost as valuable as Russia with Super Subs :roll:
-
Believe his rational for the one IC per territory limit was because Colonial Garrison cannot be used to create two industrial complexes on the same territory.
Anyway, putting an IC on a transport fleet isn’t really that hard to conceptualize. How do you think you’d get an IC out to Borneo anyway? The parts would be shipped by transport, right?
-
The Colonial Garrison thing is apples and oranges. UK has no way to MOVE an IC. So building one where you already have one, if you maintain the territory build limit, is a waste of the IC because it gains you nothing.
-
Your industrial complexes each may move 1 territory during your noncombat move phase.
i think this means land only, no transports IMO.
i would like to see this kind of thread for each nation too. i’m learning these rules and find this infromitive.
i have just read all the NA’s and i find USSR’s are not the best -
Your industrial complexes each may move 1 territory during your noncombat move phase.
i think this means land only, no transports IMO.
i would like to see this kind of thread for each nation too. i’m learning these rules and find this infromitive.
i have just read all the NA’s and i find USSR’s are not the bestYea, I plan to open the other four nations soon. This was a trial balloon. :P
-
Mobile Industry
IN RESPONSE TO THE THREAT FROM THE RUSSIAN FRONT, THE SOVIETS MOVEDTHEIR FACTORIES EAST. THEY PRODUCED 5,000 TANKS EAST OF THE URALS IN
1942.
Your industrial complexes each may move 1 territory during your noncombat move phase. It may
be used in the same turn to place units (up to a maximum of the new territory’s value) if you
controlled both the industrial complex and its new territory at the start of your turn. They cannot
move during the combat move phase. If an opponent captures them, that opponent cannot move
them.this is ridiculous. It means every turn the factory can “hop” around like its got wheels and drives around ploping off tanks and planes like excrement. Who’s driving this thing? Stalin himself?
This should be one time only event for each factory. It took 5-6 months to relocate the Ukrainian factories to the Urals, out of German bomber range.
-
IL
Considering how bad the Russian advantages are, over all, I don’t think allowing the complexes to move around is going to cause much strife for the Axis.
Remember, you cannot both move it into newly taken territory and build there. However, you could retreat it to friendly territory and build there (assuming it’s your territory.)
Honestly, I like the idea of bringing the Caucasus IC up to Karelia eventually. Yea, Cuacasus is high value, but Karelia is easier to defend and it si a VC
-
yes but the same factory can move every turn! its like they use the Caucasus factory and plop it in any territory getting infantry to any Soviet territory… which is like why even have the Railway NA? the factory NA can do this better.
The second Soviet factory can deploy against the Japanese and then back up or advance each turn like a siege tower…
If you think about it its makes AA into chutes and ladders… totally unrealistic.
-
i can see slowing it, but not limiting the number of moves.
what i mean is you can’t use it the turn it moves. that would mean it would slow it’s use, but not limit it too much.i always thought USSR should have a new Malita/conscript unit, and NA’s could work for this great. at $1 or $2 they get a unit that attacks and deffends at 1, Artillary has no bonus to it, and it can only move with in USSR starting territoris. that was before the west USSR teritory, so that may extend to that, but not further.
it’s a little off topic, but it also fits hear i think as it would be a NA…. cheap crummy infantry. -
cheap crummy infantry….
yea thats something they had alot of. Not exactly PC but accurate.
-
Well, the Railway works differently then mobile Industry.
The biggest difference is the IC has to take forever to move east and when it gets there it’s producing 1 unit.
The Railway can move thousands of units in a turn two spaces. Much better, IMHO, if you are going KJF.
However, the most I ever see the Russian IC move is into Ukraine.
-
war should never be PC, when you make it so you lose more then you should.
another option would be allow them something like China has in the Pacific. free Infantry but if they meet a condition of holding the right teritories.
i like the cheap crumy infantry better though as it has more charicter and shows how poor there economy realy was. -
AARe has Siberian Conscripts. Doesn’t work out too well for Russia.
Back to AAR
So we’re pretty secure with the statement that:
Mobilize Industrial Complexes means you may move that Industrial Complex to any Russian controlled land territory at the time you move it. If the territory was conquered this round, then no units may be built there. If the unit started the round under Russia’s control, then it may build up to the land value of the territory.
Sorry, i want to avoid re-writing the National Advantages. I want to lock down definitions and clear up ambiguities on the ones we have in LHTR. I admit, 67-100% of Russia’s NAs suck.
-
Mobilize Industrial Complexes means you may move that Industrial Complex to any land territory Russian controlled at the time you move it. If the territory was conquered this round, then no units may be built there. If the territory started the round under Russia’s control, then it may build up to the land value of the territory. More than 1 IC may occupy the same territory, but the build limit for the territory remains the territory value regardless of the number of IC’s
-
Well, the Railway works differently then mobile Industry.
Yes this is true moving the factory every turn and bringing down 2-3 infantry in any Soviet Territory ( depending on its value) is much faster deployment of troops than the ones moving 2 spaces along those listed territories. How many units would be moving from west to east? i guess not more than 2-3 anyway.
Thats why it seems like it sort of trumps the Railway NA because its more efficient. The only thing the Railway thing is good for is ONE extra space for TWO units ONLY within those listed territories.
-
And the IC drops to 1 unit once you reach Yakut; and the units still only achieve a net 1 space move with the mobile IC instead of 2 spaces per turn with the railway.
Plus the Mobile IC puts the actual IC at risk which is never a concern with the railway.
-
No its worse than that. The Soviet player can capture a Japanese territory or German territory and bring the factory closer. If Japan gets bumped off the mainland or looks weak the Soviets can place a factory over by Manchuria and really give a Japanese a good KJF.
The fact that every turn it can move makes it ridiculous because it will always be out of harms way. never bombed, never taken unless the Soviet player likes to play Russian roulette with his army and take lots of chances.
I would never choose the railway NA just to gain one space in NCM
Suggested Topics
