Painted Major ICs, Minors, Strict Neutrals

@Soviet-Steamroller That is correct.

Yeah, the issue is that I would like Ethopia in USSR hands, it is one that is avoidable, like I said, I have seen a USSR marker on it but I wasn’t playing this game so I didn’t see how it came. However, I usually have no problem getting to Somalia, and the northern African territories can be confusing because in my case, UK had Italy on a stalemate front line not pressing so Italy had no reason to assume what I was doing until of course he saw me bring my mech. into Africa.

@taamvan:

I should clarify n correct my past comments re how the bid is used in tournaments;  In tournaments; you can only buy units with the bid.  You cannot buy bases or factories (right away), and you cant save money.

However, at Gencon/Origins/Smorey Swamp TN, you can put all the units in one square.   This apparently didn’t come up in the earlier tournament in 2016, but no-one there objected to putting the higher bids all in one square in 2017, which is not really a problem in most editions but it adds some choices when the bid is higher.

42.2 average bids 7-12 to Allies
G42 average bids 0 to either
Classic automatic bid of 9 to Axis
G40 no tourney bid that I know of but bids average 8-20 in league

Since the bid is a house rule, you can apply it however you like.   The bid should be a game changer.   The bids that place a fighter into the German open or a sub (or 2) into Taranto change the game and change blowout battles into more equal contests.

That is interesting that in tournaments you are not allowed to save money.

Like I said earlier, the main reason I like to save most of the bid has to do with the fact that the UK will know where it needs to focus its resources much better at the start of its second round compared to round 1.  Although I will admit a sub for the Med and fighter on Scotland is very good value and tough to beat.

Dido what everyone else said.

You should have the Russian minor in Leningrad and prob Ukraine as well a couple turns after you invade Russia, so there really is no need to spend the IPCs up there for redundancy.

You can buy a second German transport for 7 IPCs (cheaper) and move 2 more units (4 tot) through the Baltic and threaten all Russian territories that boarders the Baltic Sea (or even the White Sea sz 127 if you venture out). Besides threatening multiple territories, transports can be used to reinforce or counter attack as well. A 3rd German transport in the water (with some added fleet) will keep the London in a defensive position in the early/mid game too.

Finally as others pointed out a German IC in Scandinavia will quickly draw the attention of the USA. Norway/Finland is already a target, you really don’t want to magnify it IMO.

I believe the Alpha+3 rules have changed it to “Axis” control now. If any Axis power controls India, Japan gets the $5 bonus. In some games, I have seen Italy get strong enough to take India.
This is also true for Japan’s other NOs. (Sydney, Honolulu, San Francisco, the four DEI territories and the five islands – Midway, Wake, Guam, Gilbert and Solomons). They can be held by Axis powers, not just Japan, and Japan will get the $5 bonus.
Seems kind of silly to me but I guess Larry wanted to make it slightly easier for Japan to get their NOs, or at least make it seem like it was easier.

Like I said, I have seen a couple of games where Italy took Calcutta, although by that time it is usually pretty much game over for the Allies. Also, I imagine if Germany or Italy managed to invade Central US, they could conceivably go on and take Western US, which would result in Japan getting a $5 NO.
It’s really hard to imagine a German or Italian task force floating all the way to the Pacific and taking any of the 5 small islands, the DEI, Honolulu or Sydney, but I guess it could happen in some kind of weirdly played game. Maybe Larry wanted it to be open to any type of off the wall scenarios.

I tried it already:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=20754.75

It wasn’t one of my better games and I doubt it should be used as a guideline (think it was my third Global?)

I wouldn’t recommend it under the current True Neutral rules unless Germany or Japan seriously sends some loaded transports and a carrier group to contest S. America (and be willing to invest in a minor IC as well).  It’s just too much bonus to the US with all those extra free infantry produced.  Japan could send a loaded transport(s) to take Chile on J3 in conjunction with an attack on Pearl Harbor; if Germany is threatening a Sealion and the US is built heavily into the Europe theater, it might work.  You could also try a combined assault with Germany attacking from Gibraltar on G3 to seize Brazil or Argentina while Japan invades Chile; if you combine both carrier groups together and both powers built minor ICs, it could tie up the US for quite a while.  It will also be a huge drain on the Axis war effort too, for a measly 8 S. American IPCs, but it might be worth it if it takes the US out of the war for another 4-5 turns.

I just want to say, that in real life in 1944 the US produced 3x more planes than all other world powers combined. If you make it historical, you have to give the US an income of 200/turn. The idea is that it be an entertaining game and that it jog your memory of history class.

No. It just stays there.

(Unless it is in a Chinese territory… then it is removed.)