Larry Harris, G42, Russia In China, Question

Well I actually found the answer to my question in the rulebook. I must have misread it in my flipping back and forth of reading rules.

“However, if it’s not yet at war by the Collect Income phase of its third turn, the United States may declare war on any or all Axis powers at the beginning of that phase.”

Therefore the US NOs would be collected on US3.

Agree with GHG, the limitation there is because you spend so many resources and so much time building up as the USA, it just wouldn’t seem fair that you could just pick off his invasion force, which in some situations, the USA player can not replace for 2 turns or possibly, ever.      Of course, its still pretty much impossible to invade japan proper unless you are demolishing him economically and even then, it takes quite a bit of time to get the forces over there–however, japan is not the only place he can kami --how is it fair to let him kami a transport that’s coming into iwo jima to set up a US strongpoint there?

The true limitation of the kamikaze is that there are really only 4 units that can be hit by it; dd ca cv bb    (no subs, transports, or planes, so its a long list), and 2 of those things aren’t sunk by just 1 hit.

Carriers are the most vulnerable, but they don’t even have to come along, they can wait in the wings and all they bring to the battle is soak hits.

Plenty of times when the allies attack SZ 6 they do it with like 2-3 naval units and 10+ planes, so the kami isn’t effective alone in stopping him.

The reason to keep it around in Japan’s pocket is that it ruins his support shots, iirc

Its a fun flavorful rule but its just piling on because Japan doesn’t really need it in order to survive or thrive, and usually when you try to depend on it it fails miserably in a gigantic blaze of glory.  I say try n dump it (we do in G42 G41 at times)!

Well the result is that when Japans DOW in J3 the US is NOT yet at war until the end of her turn. So Japan can do what it wants until US4…

pretty good explanation…cant argue.

@Gargantua:

It’s not about when you attack but how…… Erosion is the name of the game.

This is the best part of this whole thread, and i totally agree with that.

Personally, i have attacked Russia on G2, G3, G4 and even G5 after Russia attack Germany on R4…All of them are viable. It depends, as Garg was pointing out, on HOW you do it.

@Zallomallo:

@Zcion:

Quick clarification:

in before mentioned case, UK income 8+5 from NO, 4 ger subs in sz109 and 1 in sz119.
would uk loose 8 or 10 ipc due to convoy disruption?

afaik you cant convoy disrup NO?

many thx
Zcion

Correct, disruption is capped by the surrounding territories’ income.

Well, it’s capped by the total value of each convoy zone’s adjacent spaces, which can technically exceed income collected from those territories.  But you’re correct in that disruption does not affect National Objectives or at least does not affect the 40 on West US.

However, I’m not certain of the timing of convoy vs objectives and whether convoy disruption affects total income after objectives are collected.  Convoys can only affect values of territories, but since they can exceed income you’d collect from territories (by the double dips similar to 109/119), I don’t know whether than can dig a little into objectives.  Based on the Pac40 west US errata, it would seem no but this is not specifically addressed by the errata, which clarified that WUS was not worth 40, it was only worth 10, and could only be blocked up to 10.

So, as long as britain is making an additional 2 ipcs income through other territories, if sz109 and sz119 are fully blocked, Britain will lose 10 ipcs (8 for 109 and 2 for 119).  If Britain is making less than 10 IPCs in income before national objectives, they collect 0 for those their territorial income, and then collect national objective ipcs.

However, it’s VERY rare indeed that the UK does not still collect from an african or canadian territory that would put its territorial income over 10, in which case, if sc109 and 119 are fully blocked, they lose 10 IPCS.

@MEGAEINSTEIN:

in AAG40 SU recieves no ipcs for japanese agression

I think he’s refering to the proposed rule changes, which would give either Japan or SU 10 IPCs when the other breaks the truce.

@axisisthebest:

from harris game design

http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=4035

the alpha+ playtest specifications, changes that are made will be in red

Wow. we have a completely different game now.