Your logic was good.
But, fortunately for us, it does not become a closed case.
So we get a pretty interesting insight from Krieghund.
:-)
@Baron:
Your logic was good.
But, fortunately for us, it does not become a closed case.
So we get a pretty interesting insight from Krieghund. :-)
Yes we are. Krieghund is taking my insight and putting some flowers on top of it to make them look like his!!!
He is saying the exact same thing as Iam.
:-D :-o :-) :wink:
Yes, it could be repaired at any non-UK base, anywhere in the world. It’s only the UK bases that are restricted.
You are contradicting yourself and the rules here.
I feel compelled to agree with ShadowHawk here, but I’m going to put it down to a loose statement.
ANZAC capital is lost…who?
Huh? I think I’ve lost Sydney 3 times and the only time it didn’t result in a loss of game was when I was able to use US air plus the ANZAC infantry on New Zealand to retake the capital.
Ooh, shouldn’t it be Canberra! Might as well call the US capital New York. Maybe North Americans and/or Europeans are not aware of Canberra?
@Herr:
Thanks, Krieghund and P@nther. It’s good to know that it works this way. But, having said that, I can’t really figure out why it works that way.
This is the remaining question. Why should a power with a lost capital be able to use its naval bases for extending its ships movement but not for repairing the ships?
I made a video to demonstrate the rule;
https://youtu.be/I0gxQACErD8
In the case of UK, the picture is complicated a bit by its dual economy. The requirement for the physical repair capacity is the same, but the source of the resources is different. Per the rules I quoted above, an economy that has a captured capital may not do repairs, and the two economies make their own separate purchases and repairs. If the repair is being done at an allied naval base, it doesn’t really matter which economy “pays” for it (the units don’t belong to a specific economy once they’re on the board), so this can be done if either capital is free. However, the rules I quoted prohibit the repair of units by an economy with a captured capital, as well as the use of resources from one UK economy with the facilities of the other, so that rules out repairing at a Europe base using Pacific resources, and vice versa, if either capital is enemy-held.
So, just as an example, suppose that India is held by Japan but the Philippines are still held by the US and Kwantung by the UK (admittedly, this is quite unlikely). Now if a damaged British battleship ends its turn in SZ35, next round it will be auto-repaired by the US naval base, and we’re assuming that London pays for it even if the amount is 0. However, if the damaged British battleship ends its turn in SZ20, it will not be auto-repaired because for some reason, London can’t pay for it now. I think that’s quite strange - if London is doing the repair at the US base, why can’t London be doing the repair at the UK base? I really see no reason why Calcutta (which admittedly can’t do repairs at that time) is now suddenly supposed to provide the money. They own the base, not the ship.
All in all, I’m glad that such events are unlikely to happen frequently.
I suppose another question is how this rule makes the game better in any way?
I agree with you ShadowHawk. It seems to me if you pull into one of your allies ports they would want to repair your Battleship even if you didn’t have the money since it costs a fraction of what building a new one would cost. Maybe just not be able to repair it in your own port because you have no money. I’m not suggesting a house rule here I’m just saying that would’ve made more sense.
 The assumption is that the cost (too small to be represented by a full IPC) is borne by the UK Pacific economy.
If you let repair cost 1 IPC that would have solved a lot of rule issues. And honestly, 1 IPC aint that much
Maybe just not be able to repair it in your own port because you have no money.
Still too much confusion! If your allies can use your port, you should be able to too.
The assumption is that the cost (too small to be represented by a full IPC) is borne by the UK Pacific economy.
If you let repair cost 1 IPC that would have solved a lot of rule issues. And honestly, 1 IPC aint that much
Hardly. The debate is not about the cost itself, but about which economy is supposedly paying it. Everybody agrees that even when the cost is 0, an economy that has lost its capital can’t pay that “amount”.
There should be no confusion on the rules.
1940 was designed as a two map game. The only power that has to deal with it is the UK.
Throw out “reality”, this is just a game.
I still have issues with the Generals you tube video that UK ships can repair on the USA east coast (Europe map) because UK Europe Capital is lost.
UK ships in the case of UK Europe lost (London has fallen) should only be able to repair on the Pacific map board.
The issue is we have 2 rule books covering two individual games and then a few pages mashing them all into one on a few pages at the end of each book as the global rules and calling it 1940 global rules.
** I will admit this scenario we are so hotly debating is such a non factor it is amusing…but, hey, we are gamers and love discussing stupid things.**
I didn’t make the rules. Regardless of what you think of the video, Krieghund was clear about the fact that the UK could repair it’s Battleship in the Eastern US if London had fallen but India was still in British hands. You can play the game any way you choose, but those are the official rules of the game as set by Larry Harris.
That contradicts my reading of the rules. Can it be explained where I’m reading it wrongly?
My reading is that if Calcutta is lost, the UK purchase and repair phase only applies to the Europe side.
And if you are concerned about realism, why doesn’t repair take any time?
I didn’t make the rules. Regardless of what you think of the video, Krieghund was clear about the fact that the UK could repair it’s Battleship in the Eastern US if London had fallen but India was still in British hands. You can play the game any way you choose, but those are the official rules of the game as set by Larry Harris.
My reading is that if Calcutta is lost, the UK purchase and repair phase only applies to the Europe side.
When London is lost and Calcutta is still British:
Q: So when and where can the damaged battleship be repaired?
A: During the Purchase+Repair Phase of the UK-Pacific economy at every friendly operative naval base except British naval bases belonging to the UK-Europe economy.
When Calcutta is lost and London is still British:
Q: So when and where can the damaged battleship be repaired?
A: During the Purchase+Repair Phase of the UK-Europe economy at every friendly operative naval base except British naval bases belonging to the UK-Pacific economy.
What I mean is this rule seems to say that there is no repair on the Pacific side if Calcutta is lost, and none on the Europe side if London is lost:
@Pac:
Purchase and Repair
Each of United Kingdom Europe and Pacific makes its own separate purchases and repairs.
Why am I reading it wrongly?
Is it just the remarks above that vary what is the apparent meaning of the rules?
Why skip the purchase and repair phase when your capital is captured?
Let it be “on”, this Power don’t have any money. He will be able to only repair warships anyway.
If, in the next round, this Power have previously managed to capture an enemy’s capital (during the last game round) and have money at the beginning of his turn, so be it. Let it purchase units in secondaries ICs. Most will be minors.
This restriction seems a vestigial remnants of Classic game. The Global game is supposed to be about VCs. And Axis Power claiming Victory needs to own its Capital to do so.
What I mean is this rule seems to say that there is no repair on the Pacific side if Calcutta is lost, and none on the Europe side if London is lost:
@Pac:
Purchase and Repair
Each of United Kingdom Europe and Pacific makes its own separate purchases and repairs.Why am I reading it wrongly?
Is it just the remarks above that vary what is the apparent meaning of the rules?
There is no repair in the UK Pacific economy if Calcutta is lost and no repair in the UK Europe economy if London is lost. This is not the same as the Pacific map or the Europe map. The UK Pacific economy is defined in the rules as “all of the territories controlled by United Kingdom on the Pacific map”, and the UK Europe economy is defined in the rules as “all of the territories controlled by United Kingdom on the Europe map” (italics are mine). (Of course, there are a few exceptions regarding individual territories, as specified in the rules.) Territories controlled by other Allied powers are part of neither economy, and that’s why repairs are allowed there if either UK capital is free.
I understand that there was a need to rule on this. I get that if a powers capital is captured that you didn’t want them to be able to purchase units or make repairs to facilities because they have no IPCs. Ships however don’t require IPCs for repair so IMHO I don’t think ship repairs should have been included in the capture capital rules. To me how ship repairs are handled in this situation seems a little off.
OK London is captured by the axis (Calcutta still belongs to UK) so UK ships on the Euro side can’t be repaired at UK ports on the Euro map because they are part of the London econ. However those same ports can make repairs on US ships (or other allied ships). I just simply don’t see why those same ports have the men, tools and parts to fix US ships, but can’t repair their own UK ships. It’s like saying if London is captured the Gibraltar port allows US ships to move +1, but UK ships don’t get the movement bonus. Either the port is operational or it isn’t.
I also feel the same if Washington was captured that US ships can’t be repaired in other US ports, but UK ships could? So the Yorktown (US) and Victorious (UK) are both at Hawaii. The Victorious (which was on loan to the USA BTW) is repaired no problem. Sorry guys we’re going to have to scrap the Yorktown because maritime law prohibits us to make repairs to our own ships.
I think it would have been much cleaner to simply allow any functional port to make free repairs. There would be no need to go into captured capitals etc……and would be far less confusing IMO.
@Baron:
Why skip the purchase and repair phase when your capital is captured?
Let it be “on”, this Power don’t have any money. He will be able to only repair warships anyway.
If, in the next round, this Power have previously managed to capture an enemy’s capital (during the last game round) and have money at the beginning of his turn, so be it. Let it purchase units in secondaries ICs. Most will be minors.This restriction seems a vestigial remnants of Classic game. The Global game is supposed to be about VCs. And Axis Power claiming Victory needs to own its Capital to do so.
@WILD:
I understand that there was a need to rule on this. I get that if a powers capital is captured that you didn’t want them to be able to purchase units or make repairs to facilities because they have no IPCs. Ships however don’t require IPCs for repair so IMHO I don’t think ship repairs should have been included in the capture capital rules. To me how ship repairs are handled in this situation seems a little off.
OK London is captured by the axis (Calcutta still belongs to UK) so UK ships on the Euro side can’t be repaired at UK ports on the Euro map because they are part of the London econ. However those same ports can make repairs on US ships (or other allied ships). I just simply don’t see why those same ports have the men, tools and parts to fix US ships, but can’t repair their own UK ships. It’s like saying if London is captured the Gibraltar port allows US ships to move +1, but UK ships don’t get the movement bonus. Either the port is operational or it isn’t.
I also feel the same if Washington was captured that US ships can’t be repaired in other US ports, but UK ships could? So the Yorktown (US) and Victorious (UK) are both at Hawaii. The Victorious (which was on loan to the USA BTW) is repaired no problem. Sorry guys we’re going to have to scrap the Yorktown because maritime law prohibits us to make repairs to our own ships.
I think it would have been much cleaner to simply allow any functional port to make free repairs. There would be no need to go into captured capitals etc……and would be far less confusing IMO.
Does it happens often that Germany is conquered previous round (lost all IPCs), then on his turn conquered Moscow (and get money). And finally, on the third round would be in position to purchase units while Berlin was not controlled?
