Turn Order Debate/Confusion.

Thank you so much Rabbit, exactly what I was looking for!
:)

No harm at all. I was just mentioning that they were the same ones. It’s easy to forget that the green pieces in the game aren’t actually the Americans, but rather the Allies who have retreated back to North America after losing WW2. I didn’t realize until you had posted your link that the Meteor was actually a British fighter.

Yep, he’s right.

For instance, even if Warsaw falls to the Germans, Polish forces in E and W Poland do not move only defend.

We are playing again on Friday. Any chance it will be up Friday morning?

Two quick clarifications guys. Sorry I don’t have more time these days… working on big projects!

1. I looked as far back as I could and couldn’t find any starting Fallshirms… Build them G1 if you like!

2. For the UK/Canada/S. Africa Commandos Will Bill is correct. Build them in any of these countries, but they all go toward the UK/ Commonwealth total. These countries are typically played as one in my games…

Another possible solution could arise if the map is ever redrawn. Please note that I am not suggesting the map be redrawn just to solve this problem.

However if the map does get changed at any point I suggest splitting Reims into two separate territories.  The northern territory would border Holland and the southern territory would border West Germany and Bavaria.  Then you could increase the fortifications for the southern territory.  This would seem to be the most elegant solution.

Another idea is to just increase the fortifications in Reims to encourage Germany to go into Holland. As a counter, since not every game should have this, if France falls but Holland was never invaded, Holland becomes a reluctant German ally.

The logic behind this is that Belgium and Holland were too intimidated to enter the war on the Allies side and thus risk fighting the war on their soil.  How much more intimidated would they have been with no allies on the continent and the knowledge that  Britain could not protect them?

Under such a scenario I would see Germany collecting all of the income and resources for all of Belgium/Holland. This would be detrimental to Japan and could prove interesting.

I will attempt to answer what I can here. I will note rules in red, and my opinion in blue

@WILD:

I do have some other questions about the Chinese factions. Some are carry over from before, but not answered definitively by the game’s creators.

Was the word original intended to be in the text under Nat Chinese (#8 pg29). It says the Nat Chinese can capture original Red Chinese territories instead of liberating them. There are only two original Red Chinese territories in the game, so are the Nat Chinese allowed to capture (or retake) unoccupied territories from the Reds that aren’t original Red Chinese. This could be interpreted that they can not capture Red Chinese territories that aren’t original, which would prevent them from taking back their own territories from the Reds (which would be silly, but fixes the double dipping thing LOL).

Liberating a territory by definition means restoring it to it’s original owner after taking it from an invader. If Nat Chinese take control of a Japanese held territory that was originally Com Chinese owned, they capture for themselves instead of returning control of it to Com China. And, although omitted from the rules, the vice versa would also be true. I will be sure to include that in the next revision.

This question may actually help solve the “double china income” problem. I am still working on that. If we only allow a Chinese faction to take a territory from the other Chinese faction when captured from an Axis country, it would solve the problem, right? In other words, Chinese can’t take from each other unless they are taking it from the Japanese. Let me know.

Both Chinese powers are on on the Allies side, can they both be on the same territory. Russian units could back up the either Chinese powers, are the Chinese allowed to reinforce each other?

No, they can’t occupy the same territory. That is what is meant in the rules when it says they cannot attack each other.

When the Japanese capture a Chinese capital do they get the income stored there. Rules don’t say specifically (that I saw anyway), but do say the only exceptions are for Russia & UK (stored income goes to bank), so I would think YES the Japanese also capture the income from both Chinese factions. Being the Chinese can capture unoccupied territories from each other, would that include capturing income if that territory is a capital. This could be a good move to keep Chinese income from falling into Japanese hands. I Know that in G40 the Chinese income isn’t transferred (Chinese keep it for later), but that game doesn’t have Chinese capitals either.

Since the Chinese taking each other’s territories is still a bit up in the air, I will only comment on Axis powers capturing Chinese capitals. Yes, they would capture the income stored there as well.

The Communist China rules (pg29) don’t list territories the Red Chinese can enter or not enter (FEC or French to be exact). Rules do say the Reds can attack an axis power w/Russia as long as both are at war with that axis power. So they can liberate or capture Japanese held territories with a joint venture, and I would imagine they could also attack Japanese held territories by themselves outside of the Chinese borders just like the Nat Chinese (although this would be difficult with just inf). Are the Red Chinese limited to French territories, and Hong Kong (like the Nat Chinese) or can they enter any original UK FEC territory by design (just as Russia could). Furthermore can the Red Chinese leave China and NCM into orig FEC or Russian owned territories to seek refuge or reinforce (this last one is doubtful).

Since the rules don’t address this, and we’ve never had it come up, I will offer my personal opinion. I would only allow the Com Chinese to move within the confines of Com China, Nat China, Japanese controlled China, and Hong Kong. Remember, they were not friends with the French or the Brits. Hong Kong could be considered a special case perhaps. I will pose this to the group and get an official ruling

@WILD:

Clarification for Variable :
Germany took Paris G1. This means that Italy joins the axis the beginning of It1 and would automatically be at war.

Italy doesn’t have the option of not going to war with Euro allies (UK & France) It1 if Paris falls right? If Paris falls, or Russia is attacked G1 the Italians join the axis It1 which means a DOW w/UK (and France) is assumed at the beginning of Italy’s turn.

Being that on UK1 Italy is still neutral, UK (and French) ships can pass through Italian occupied sz’s, and even share them if they choose to right. In other words a sz occupied w/neutral Italian ships doesn’t make it hostel, and may be passed through, or shared w/ships from the the allies.

2a) So in my above example the UK could slide a transport into sz40 w/the Italian navy to activate Greece and Yugo at the same time.

2b) On UK1, the English (or Free French) could NCM a dd to sz 41 w/neutral Italian ships, and on the Italians first turn they must join the axis by rule (Paris fell) and because they are at war now (w/UK & France), the allied dd in sz 41 would block the Italian fleet in sz39 from attacking the allies ships in sz42 right.

This all seems correct to me. Nice strat!