A lot of posters seemed stunned at this scenario, never scene it ever happen or even could happen. Now that I mulled it over last night and looked at the rules and so forth it is very obvious to me why no one has ever scene this scenario. Because the scenario makes no logical sense.
Italy DOW on Russia and moves in 2 tanks into Eastern Poland.
Russia is now at war with Italy and can DOW on Germany at the start of their next turn, turn 3.
Germany on Turn 3 does not DOW on Russia and just non combats into Eastern Poland.
Russia at the start of Turn 3 DOW on Germany and off we go.There is no logical reason why Russia would not DOW on Germany at the start of Turn 3, none.
Heck you could argue that it makes no logical sense that Germany did not DOW on Russia at the start of G3 since Italy brought Russia into the war and Russia WILL DOW on Germany on R3.
Hi PainState,
From my perspective, if I was planning on doing a G3 Barbarossa AND I wanted to drive towards the south, then yes, it makes sense to not DOW. My stack will be together except for the minimum required mobile units and maybe 1 AAA in Poland so Russia doesn’t attack Poland to get their NO for occupying an Axis territory. But E. Poland will be real strong because the German air will be there and maybe bombers will also be in range of a raid on the Moscow factory. Also, 5 IPCs is more income than I’d probably get as Germany on the 1st turn.
There are a few disadvantages of course. 1, Russian blockers can’t be attacked. 2, the Scandinavian units are behind. But for me that’s ok, I just use them to lay siege anyways. I never expect to get Moscow on turn 6 anymore. I assume that the UK/Anzac and that lone French fighter are going to get to Moscow.Â
Pacific Changes, and how they could affect global balance, DOW, and other things
-
I don’t think a J1 attack will be the cool thing to do in global. First off - it allows the US to declare war on Germany/Italy. They may not appreciate that. Second, 18 Russian infantry.
Lots of things to consider and coordinate. Do you gang up on Russia and leave the US alone for three turns? If so India and ANZAC will not be wiped… and they have the option to declare war on Russia - serving as a reverse spoiler. Do you gang up on the US/UK and leave Russia alone until turn 4? Russia can still go after Japan.
Unless some great thing was missed - every game might be different here.
-
Guys what would you think of adding 2 french infantry too french ido china.
P.S. bad speller did you lose as japan. -
I think we would have to see more of how the Pacific theater plays out in the global game first…
-
What is this Japanese NO: 10 IPCs while not at war?! … What kind of crap is this? How/why do they get 10 free IPCs a turn for doing nothing? That doesn’t make any sense… even as some sort of incentive. I don’t understand it. Does anyone else… if so can you explain it to me? Japan getting money for not being at war and money for being at war is weird; it’s just free money. :?
-
What is this Japanese NO: 10 IPCs while not at war?! … What kind of crap is this? How/why do they get 10 free IPCs a turn for doing nothing? That doesn’t make any sense… even as some sort of incentive. I don’t understand it. Does anyone else… if so can you explain it to me? Japan getting money for not being at war and money for being at war is weird; it’s just free money. :?
It represents money they got from the US before the US put an embargo on Japan. This happened after they took FIC
-
What is this Japanese NO: 10 IPCs while not at war?! … What kind of crap is this? How/why do they get 10 free IPCs a turn for doing nothing? That doesn’t make any sense… even as some sort of incentive. I don’t understand it. Does anyone else… if so can you explain it to me? Japan getting money for not being at war and money for being at war is weird; it’s just free money. :?
It represents money they got from the US before the US put an embargo on Japan. This happened after they took FIC
OK. Was the amount of money that substantial? I mean, for 10 IPCs worth in A&A.
-
I guess thats also why Germany gets 5 IPC’s for not being at war with USSR. Although in real life Germany was getting a better deal from USSR than Japan was with the US.
-
What is this Japanese NO: 10 IPCs while not at war?! … What kind of crap is this? How/why do they get 10 free IPCs a turn for doing nothing? That doesn’t make any sense… even as some sort of incentive. I don’t understand it. Does anyone else… if so can you explain it to me? Japan getting money for not being at war and money for being at war is weird; it’s just free money. :?
It represents money they got from the US before the US put an embargo on Japan. This happened after they took FIC
OK. Was the amount of money that substantial? I mean, for 10 IPCs worth in A&A.
It was enough that they needed to invade the DEI, Malaya, Philippines, Burma, New Guinea, Hong Kong, Wake, and Guam
-
Japan received a great deal of its oil from trade with the US. After Japan invaded FIC, the US imposed a trade embargo on Japan with the intent that it would curtail Japan’s imperial ambitions by stalling its war machine. Of course, the result of this embargo was the opposite of its intent. Japan invaded the Dutch East Indies in order to replace the oil supply that the US had cut off, which would result in war with Great Britain.
Japan coordinated this invasion with surprise attacks throughout the Pacific in order to leave its enemies decimated and in no position to oppose it. Fearing that the US would eventually enter the war, it was a decided that a pre-emptive strike was in order to knock out the US’ war-making capacity for long enough for Japan to consolidate its new empire. Of course, this plan failed utterly.
-
Japan received a great deal of its oil from trade with the US. After Japan invaded FIC, the US imposed a trade embargo on Japan with the intent that it would curtail Japan’s imperial ambitions by stalling its war machine. Of course, the result of this embargo was the opposite of its intent. Japan invaded the Dutch East Indies in order to replace the oil supply that the US had cut off, resulting in war with Great Britain.
Thank you for clearing this up everyone. :-)
-
This is from a post analyzing the NO on the thread on the Pacific 1940 board.
@SAS:
Thinking about it a little more I suppose it basically compensates Japan for removing the 1 or 2 planes from the setup (build a fighter for each of the 2 turns Japan will get the NO until the US comes in turn 3) and forces them to be further back from the front lines when they are built. At least the Japanese only will get the NO for 2 turns pretty much.
So essentially the changes keep the Japanese initially the same, just with a little less airforce available immediately, and boosts the Allies a little bit. I suppose with that explanation and the historical basis of the embargo on Japan after they began attacking I’m feeling a little more comfortable with it.
Just remember that Japan would only be getting this NO before the US is allowed to declare war on them, and unless the US player is daft they will do that as soon as they are allowed to in order to get their own NO, so Japan will only be getting this NO twice. I guess potentially 3 times really since if they don’t declare war themselves on turn 3 they would still get it since they go before the US.
A question for transferring this NO to global though, Krieg: do you know if it will be transferred as currently worded where Japan being at war with Russia does not negate this NO either? Because otherwise it’s all the more reason for Russia to declare war on Japan right away (as if they didn’t have enough reason already).
-
If this NO makes it into the global game, I doubt the USSR will be included in it.
-
If this NO makes it into the global game, I doubt the USSR will be included in it.
IF?
Isn’t it a little late to be saying if? I was under the impression that the Global 40 rulebook is included in E40… I would think the game is on its way to retailers, if not there already.
Wouldn’t the Global book specify if this NO is in the game?
-
If this NO makes it into the global game, I doubt the USSR will be included in it.
IF?
Isn’t it a little late to be saying if? I was under the impression that the Global 40 rulebook is included in E40… I would think the game is on its way to retailers, if not there already.
Wouldn’t the Global book specify if this NO is in the game?
There could be an erratum
-
@ finnman-my test game is starting the 4th round. Japan only has 2 land units in India and no land units in asia. Japan has a pile of planes and naval near Burma. US will build a Major IC next turn with 14 Russian inf to hold it.US air sweeps removed the last 4 land units in China. China has 15inf?, 4art, 1ftr. I want to test WHY not to do a J1 attack.
-
If this NO makes it into the global game, I doubt the USSR will be included in it.
IF?
Isn’t it a little late to be saying if? I was under the impression that the Global 40 rulebook is included in E40… I would think the game is on its way to retailers, if not there already.
Wouldn’t the Global book specify if this NO is in the game?
Right, like calvin said, there could be an erratum. They are talking about implementing some or all of these changes into the Pacific 1940 game. If that happens, in the interest of keeping the global setup consistent with the setups from the Europe and Pacific 1940 games, whatever setup changes are made to the Pacific 1940 game will also be applied to the global game. They already have a setup erratum for the Pacific 1940 game and that erratum already applies to the global game, this would simply expand that erratum.
However, since the NOs for global are different from those of the individual games, this NO would not necessarily have to transfer; though honestly I think it might be more necessary for Japan in the global game than it is in the Pacific game by itself. Japan might need a little extra boost in global when having to deal with the extra headaches of coordinating with the political situation in Europe and the Russians outside of Manchuria and Korea, while in Pacific Japan obviously does just fine on her own right now and might still be able to get by even without a plane or two even with the other setup changes. :-P
-
@SAS:
Right, like calvin said, there could be an erratum. They are talking about implementing some or all of these changes into the Pacific 1940 game. If that happens, in the interest of keeping the global setup consistent with the setups from the Europe and Pacific 1940 games, whatever setup changes are made to the Pacific 1940 game will also be applied to the global game. They already have a setup erratum for the Pacific 1940 game and that erratum already applies to the global game, this would simply expand that erratum.
True. If it is in Pacific errata, I would think it would have been put in the Global book… since there was such a time delay between the two games.
Is there someplace where the Pacific erratum setup is located? Yes, I figure in the Pacific 40 Errata, but can you give me a specific link, if you know where it is?
-
@SAS:
Right, like calvin said, there could be an erratum. They are talking about implementing some or all of these changes into the Pacific 1940 game. If that happens, in the interest of keeping the global setup consistent with the setups from the Europe and Pacific 1940 games, whatever setup changes are made to the Pacific 1940 game will also be applied to the global game. They already have a setup erratum for the Pacific 1940 game and that erratum already applies to the global game, this would simply expand that erratum.
True. If it is in Pacific errata, I would think it would have been put in the Global book… since there was such a time delay between the two games.
Is there someplace where the Pacific erratum setup is located? Yes, I figure in the Pacific 40 Errata, but can you give me a specific link, if you know where it is?
Look in the AAP40 FAQ in the P40 forum
-
Is there someplace where the Pacific erratum setup is located? Yes, I figure in the Pacific 40 Errata, but can you give me a specific link, if you know where it is?
Look in the AAP40 FAQ in the P40 forum
Well, I knew that… but I will take a look. Thanks.
-
True. If it is in Pacific errata, I would think it would have been put in the Global book… since there was such a time delay between the two games.
these possible changes just came about in the last couple weeks. way too late to put in Global book. if you go to LH’s website, he’s having a discussion in regards to balancing out AAP40.
Suggested Topics
