IC's

No, you can only place major IC’s on originally owned territory of that power. So Germany could place is on norway since they originally owned it but no other power could since…well it’s Germany’s original territory.

Thought so. Wanted to check.

3-5 bombers flying to london can be the difference between sea lion success and sea lion fail. It changes the odds drastically. Because Germany has to roll 3 more hits to win… which means more 2s to roll for the defender which means more 4s to roll as the battle drags on.

So yes sometimes Japan postpones war because of bomber purchases by USA.

Interesting Wirkey…

The repsonse of course, is to have -demands- in return to whoever has requested egress through the canal :P

“when you move your troops from here to there, I will let your ships through.” :D  A deal is not a DOW!

Our games normally see the Germans build some fleet (including a couple tpts). Agreed Gibr gives many options (no AB makes it somewhat riskier), but if US comes to Norway via Gib (they can see it coming), then the Germans can delay it by simply building (or moving) a dd off coast of Normandy (sz 110) to block them for a turn. So the US (if is still going north) will normally kill the dd (move to sz 110), and have the UK build a carrier (add/planes) to try to keep the Germans from hitting them (provided the UK is still in the game). Then the US can probably take Norway (UK can land air to def), but the Germans again can be ready to counter it from the Baltic. Again our games usually see some navy builds for the Germans, and the western allies will need a good sized fleet to get close to shore.

You know, I’m kind of surprised that Larry didn’t include US Submarines in costing 3 IPCs for convoy raiding.  Historically, the US submarine force did the same thing to Japanese merchant shipping that German U-boats did to Allied shipping in the Atlantic.  In fact, the US submarines were actually successful at it whereas through convoying and ASW improvements, the U-boat threat in the Atlantic was gradually reduced.  US subs were so successful that in 1944 the US Navy had to cut back on submarine production because they already had too many and were running out of targets since they had so crippled the Japanese importing.

@djarnen:

So… in the case that UK takes Rome, while London is held by the Germans, the money from Rome would not go to Calcutta, because its on the Europe side of the board ?

Then let ANZAC take Rome, they know how to use that money, man.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Japan only has 5 more planes than at start

Yes because they have used what they had effectively and have other large naval presences. For instance a 7 strong destroyer fleet and haven broken through China, Russia and India… It has been a pain to be sure.