Is a Major IC Reduced to a Minor IC after been conquered?

@RedRyder01 Not to quibble sir, but I believe it was always meant to represent current income, not IPC on hand–that’s what the cash notes are for.

I suggest avoiding the tracker, the cash, all of it–keep track on a piece of paper or chart its much less messy and prone to error.

The new AAZ game makes that a bit more difficult because you earn money during your turn (for killing zombies and such).

@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.

FIC, if under united UK economy, can be useful for UK. I agree with you that it serves better for Japan but once again, it depends on what Japan attacks first.

@Spendo02:

Can I get a link to the rule you are referencing in regard to originally colored territories?

“Major industrial complexes can only be built on originally controlled territories (this includes upgrading minor ones). Likewise they may not be upgraded when captured. Major industrial complexes are reduced to minor when captured. The original owner of the territory may upgrade it if the territory is recaptured.”

Is all I can find on our “Alpha” ruleset.  I’m not arguing, I’m just curious if Japan can build a Major on Manchuria or Kaingsu - or if it has to include the national territory icon in order to be considered “originally controlled”

Again sorry for the wording of “originally colored territories”, it was a poor choice of wording on my part (as Little_Boot pointed out). A tt has to have your roundel on it to be considered one of your original tt’s. You can’t build a Jap major on Manchuria, or Kaingsu (they are Chinese original tt’s).

My strategy for when I play russia (I’m almost always italy or japan) I leave token defense on the border nations w germany and rally my armies in leningrad, belarus, west ukraine and ukraine. The added ic will prob help out since I now have two places where I can pump out infantry and fast units to the frontline. With the new NOs I can use the stalingrad ic to reinforce the caucasus and use moscow to send units to help out china

@kcdzim:

@Rorschach:

Consider it that the fighter escorts would have peeled away before they get to the actual facility (lack of range and/or their job of defending the bombers against interceptors is already acomplished so no need to risk going down from AA gun fire as well).

Thinking of it like that makes sense to me.  Interceptors would be intercepting as far AWAY from the facility as they possibly can, while the AA gun is fixed AT the facility.

Not to mention that AA flak is rather indiscriminate.  If it were firing on the escort, it would be firing on the interceptors as well, and the dogfight would be occuring in the thick of the flak.  And that’s not what the defender would want to do (and it would suck in the game cause the defender might lose more than the attacker due to friendly fire).  Especially since it’s the escorts duty to peel the interceptors away from the bombers and NOT keep the dogfight in the same area.

Yes, I was going to go into a much more detailed explanation including all this but time was a restraint (I was at work when I made that reply).

Really, it just makes sense if you think about it.  :)

If your (fixed position) AA guns are firing into the skies, it’s too late to scramble interceptors as this means the bombers are already over their targets AND you’d hit your own interceptors just as often as you’d  hit the enemy bombers.  Escorting fighters would have turned back before entering AA gun range so as to mitigate losses (once the bombers are over their target, no need to risk losing extra fighters that aren’t going to help out in the raid)!  AND, once the bombers are dropping their payload, what’s the point of intercepting them anyway as the damage is already done!

Yes

Very true, those fighters are very needed in Defense, as they are stronger in that regard.

Also, I did once have a sucessfull Dunkirk evacuation of my French Fighter from the French battle.  I am pretty sure its a house rule, but the way we usually play is that if there are no attacking air units, then the defending air unit can retreat to a safe territory within its range if it survives the first round of combat.

Of course it did, and my opponent forgot to throw a Stuka at France, so the Dewontine came in very useful for a possible sealion defense and also to land on a carrier later on as a defender.