G40 Halifax Rules

@Young:

Minor Factory:
Produces up to 3 units
Maximum damage 6
Unoperational at 3 damage
Incapable of building capital ships and/or strategic bombers
May be purchased at a cost of 12 IPCs
May be placed on any territory with an IPC value of 2 or greater.
May be upgraded to a Major factory for 10 IPCs (must be the original owner of the territory)

In my mind, a capital ship is a 2 hits warship: either a Fleet Carrier or a Battleship.
So it is allowed to buy a 12 IPCs Cruiser but not a 12 IPCs Strategic Bomber?

Maybe if you don’t want to allow Cruiser, maybe you should lower the cost of Minor Factory to 11 IPCs.
The line will be drawned by both the cost of the unit and the cost of the Factory.
Tactical Bomber (11 IPCs) would be allowed because it would cost the same as the purchasing price of the Factory.
So no costlier units (12 IPCs and above) could be built.

@Baron:

@Young:

Minor Factory:
Produces up to 3 units
Maximum damage 6
Unoperational at 3 damage
Incapable of building capital ships and/or strategic bombers
May be purchased at a cost of 12 IPCs
May be placed on any territory with an IPC value of 2 or greater.
May be upgraded to a Major factory for 10 IPCs (must be the original owner of the territory)

In my mind, a capital ship is a 2 hits warship: either a Fleet Carrier or a Battleship.
So it is allowed to buy a 12 IPCs Cruiser but not a 12 IPCs Strategic Bomber?

Maybe if you don’t want to allow Cruiser, maybe you should lower the cost of Minor Factory to 11 IPCs.
The line will be drawned by both the cost of the unit and the cost of the Factory.
Tactical Bomber (11 IPCs) would be allowed because it would cost the same as the purchasing price of the Factory.
So no costlier units (12 IPCs and above) could be built.

Or the line is that a Factory cannot built any units which is at the same price or higher than its purchasing cost (12 IPCs).

@Young:

All that has since been edited, it now reads… Minor Factories may only produce units that cost 10 IPCs or less.

Sorry, I didn’t notice that the opening post was edited more recently than the one quoted.

Is South Africa still part of the UK then?

Q: Does this include British Columbia? Or should well allow roundel replacement here?

Second edition Pacific 1940 shows a UK roundel in British Columbia rather than a Canadian one. Sadly

I believe this was a misprint. I suggest placing an Anzac roundel here.

@Black_Elk:

Q: Does this include British Columbia? Or should well allow roundel replacement here?

Second edition Pacific 1940 shows a UK roundel in British Columbia rather than a Canadian one. Sadly

I believe this was a misprint. I suggest placing an Anzac roundel here.

That’s what I did. I used ANZAC roundels on all the Canadian territories.

I really do like this idea and the ability to direct production should prove interesting.  The only change I would like to make to my own version is to keep Canada and ANZAC separate nations but having a shared bank.  Its a preference I would like to see Canadian roundels in the game with Canadian pieces as well.  It shouldn’t change much because ANZAC and Canada are on different sides of the board.  You could get the roundels and a UK expansion set for Canada if you chose to this instead of replacing Canada with ANZAC pieces and roundels.

Cyanight, I’m going that route also. Have Canadian roundels now and will paint or buy troops for Canada. Be nice to see Canadians attacking in Normandy or Europe.

@Black_Elk:

Q: Does this include British Columbia? Or should well allow roundel replacement here?
Second edition Pacific 1940 shows a UK roundel in British Columbia rather than a Canadian one. Sadly
I believe this was a misprint. I suggest placing an Anzac roundel here.

It is indeed a misprint, as has officially been stated here:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/faqs
http://www.wizards.com/AvalonHill/rules/AAPacific1940_2ndEdition_FAQ.pdf

Axis & Allies Pacific 1940, 2nd Edition, FAQ
July 14, 2014

Errata
The Map: Western Canada should have a Canadian emblem. It is originally controlled by the United
Kingdom.

@cyanight:

I really do like this idea and the ability to direct production should prove interesting.  The only change I would like to make to my own version is to keep Canada and ANZAC separate nations but having a shared bank.  Its a preference I would like to see Canadian roundels in the game with Canadian pieces as well.  It shouldn’t change much because ANZAC and Canada are on different sides of the board.  You could get the roundels and a UK expansion set for Canada if you chose to this instead of replacing Canada with ANZAC pieces and roundels.

Canadian roundels can be obtained from HBG:

http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Custom-Roundels–Canada_p_1378.html

For Canadian units, I use the butternut-grey British-pattern ANZAC units from Pacific 1940 1st edition, augmented by a few ANZAC anti-aircraft artillery units from the 2nd edition (since this unit type was lacking in the 1st ed).  Under this arrangement, the butternut grey colour = the Commonwealth Dominions (except Eire, which was neutral).  The Canadian units can be extended to cover Newfoundland.  South Africa can be represented either by the Canadian or 2nd-ed ANZAC units, depending on one’s preference.

CWO, thanks for the reminder, I do have those British pieces from Pacific. I used to use them for Italians in my other G39 game.

@Young:

I’m working off my 1st edition map

A related point is that Canada’s West Coast underwent a jurisdictional change between the 1st ed and 2nd ed maps, with BC and Yukon Territory being fused into “Western Canada”.

All British baige starting units on Canadian territories must now be replaced with ANZAC gray pieces <<

Minor typo: should be “beige”.  I think “baige” would be the Australian pronunciation.  :-D

It wasn’t that big a deal for me because I just used ANZAC roundels for all Commonwealth territories so I covered up both British and Canadian roundels.
With this game, I am not a fan of having Canada as a separate power. I know that Canada contributed a lot during the real war, but in this game they are just too weak at 7 IPCs per turn. In most of our games, ANZAC never really gets to contribute very much because of their remoteness and small income. I think it would be even worse for Canada. At start they have 1 Minor IC/Minor Factory, 2 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 tank, 1 transport and 1 destroyer. They don’t even have any aircraft (unless you modify the setup) and would take 2 turns just to be able to buy 1 fighter.
I also didn’t like weakening UK’s economy -7 but if you play with a combined UK income then that isn’t such a problem.
Now, Italy also starts with only 10 IPCs per turn, but they are in a more centralized location and start out with a good sized military. So you can get things going pretty good with them depending on what UK does and if they get some help from big brother Germany.
That’s why I like the Commonwealth idea. I include South Africa in it so they start with 20 IPCs and can make more of a contribution and a variety of places to assert that influence. Also, changing the starting Minor factories to Major factories helps too.