"Sydney has fallen!" Does it matter?

New Zealand should continue the fight after Sydney falls, but capital sacking rules and that silly non-island ICs rule don’t allow that (as much, it should be “no ICs for Dutch East Indies”)

@Funcioneta:

New Zealand should continue the fight after Sydney falls, but capital sacking rules and that silly non-island ICs rule don’t allow that (as much, it should be “no ICs for Dutch East Indies”)

If Sydney has fallen, what does NZ fight with, making 2 ipc’s a turn? It will eventually fall.

@Funcioneta:

New Zealand should continue the fight after Sydney falls, but capital sacking rules and that silly non-island ICs rule don’t allow that (as much, it should be “no ICs for Dutch East Indies”)

Its sounds like this an easy house rule fix.

@finnman:

@Funcioneta:

New Zealand should continue the fight after Sydney falls, but capital sacking rules and that silly non-island ICs rule don’t allow that (as much, it should be “no ICs for Dutch East Indies”)

Its sounds like this an easy house rule fix.

I think the No Island IC is historical, since most islands don’t have enough resources to build a factory or the things within. Besided, ANZAC can’t afford an IC for NZ, it’s better spent on 3 artillery or mech.

@Dylan:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@finnman:

@Funcioneta:

New Zealand should continue the fight after Sydney falls, but capital sacking rules and that silly non-island ICs rule don’t allow that (as much, it should be “no ICs for Dutch East Indies”)

Its sounds like this an easy house rule fix.

I think the No Island IC is historical, since most islands don’t have enough resources to build a factory or the things within. Besided, ANZAC can’t afford an IC for NZ, it’s better spent on 3 artillery or mech.

But you could buy 4 Infantry then, instead of only 3 Artillery.

3 Artillery=12 die points
4 Infantry= 12 die points

But in the end you get more hits all together, and Australia do not need an extra Artillery.

You can’t buy 4 inf since ANZAC only has 1 minor factory

@Dylan:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Dylan:

@calvinhobbesliker:

@finnman:

@Funcioneta:

New Zealand should continue the fight after Sydney falls, but capital sacking rules and that silly non-island ICs rule don’t allow that (as much, it should be “no ICs for Dutch East Indies”)

Its sounds like this an easy house rule fix.

I think the No Island IC is historical, since most islands don’t have enough resources to build a factory or the things within. Besided, ANZAC can’t afford an IC for NZ, it’s better spent on 3 artillery or mech.

But you could buy 4 Infantry then, instead of only 3 Artillery.

3 Artillery=12 die points
4 Infantry= 12 die points

But in the end you get more hits all together, and Australia do not need an extra Artillery.

You can’t buy 4 inf since ANZAC only has 1 minor factory

These new IC rules are confusing.

Dude, the IC chits HAVE THE NUMBER OF UNITS YOU CAN MOBILIZE THERE PRINTED ON IT!

I have kinda liked outlawing IC on Islands. We are thinking of ruling that into AA 50 when we play. I think we might even do the major minor complex thing too. The 12 cost of a minor IC is rather appealing. Then you could also do a fix to the imp factory tech. Major IC gets 2 extra units, minor gets 1 extra unit. I wonder how imp fact tech will work in global (sounds like its still there).