Pacific 1940 review copy has arrived

@Stumne:

Ok, the US start with 17, once at war with Japan is the 17+30 each turn, or just 30 (not including rest of bonuses)?

Also, and I suppose this applies to all games, does a country not at war at the start of the game, in case of Pacific UK  and ANZAC do they still get IPC, can purchase and move pieces?

Welcome to the forum, Stuart. :-)

Your first question:

@rulebook:

The United States begins the game neutral. It may not declare
war on Japan unless Japan first declares war on it or makes an
unprovoked declaration of war against the United Kingdom or
ANZAC. Following any such unprovoked declaration of war
by Japan, the United States will receive an immediate one-time
bonus payment of 30 IPCs, representing the total mobilization
and transfer of military assets within the continental United
States.

Those 30 are granted at the moment the scenario occurs.

@rulebook:

National Objectives and Bonus Income
…
When the United States Is at War:

30 IPCs if the United States controls Western United
States. Theme: Major shift from peacetime to wartime
economy.
…

So when at war the USA receive +30 IPCs during every US Collect Income Phase.

Your second question:

Actually UK and ANZAC “… are both at war with Japan’s allies, Germany
and Italy, on the other side of the world, so they are not completely neutral.”
(Rulebook, page eight)

When it is their turn, they act as every other power, however they have to respect some restrictions given by the rules:

@same:

When not yet at war with Japan, in addition to
the normal restrictions (see “Powers Not at War with One
Another,” page 14), neither power may move units into or
through China.

HTH :-)

Actually it’s even worse than that if your Canadian considering “Britsh Columbia” and "Yukon Territory merged into “Western Canada”. Of course gameplay is affected little to zilch by this revision.

I say that the next game needs Canada, special neutral rules for Finland, and vichy french rules (and, depending on the time period, poland as well). Why be picky and only make a few improvements?  :-D

Use the old Red Japanese A&AP Infantry for that - or potentially the old Yellow Japanese Infantry from A&A 2nd Edition.

Sounds like a good idea - care to post the full rule?

Not really a ‘trick’, but inexperienced players seem to miss some crucial sea zone connections around Australia. It’s amazing how quickly the US can get into the DEI through that route.

If you at the Aussie naval base you can hit almost all of the DEI as well as PI and can even land in Burma (!) in one turn! It’s things like that that Allied players miss that give th Japanese a bigger advantage. Once you see those, it’s MUCH harder on Japan IMO.

@Vareel:

I don’t think i’m explaining properly.  There should be convoy zones to represent what goes from the US to the UK/Russia.  If G attacks those convoy zones only, it would start war.  I think that is how it should be.  Obviously there should be other convoy zones as well, at least for the UK.

I suppose it depends how they do lend/lease but I’d prefer it not be a simply free cash objective for Britain/Russia (where’s the lending part in that).  What I’d like to see is a lend/lease that’s not a 1:1 gain for Britain and Russia.  The US can designate some number of IPCs to Russia and/or Britain (say 12) and they get half that amount (6 to the banker).  This has a sense of depreciated value and inflated cost (hey, the US is capitalist) to that “lease” from the US and doesn’t punish the axis as much trying to balance Russia & Britain’s economy vs Germany’s which could be unfairly skewed as Russia and Britain get free loot at minimal expense to the US.  And that could be designated in as a different type of convoy zone, perhaps only near the US coast, which would mean the Germans would have to go way past the Channel to stop it, if they even wanted to.  It has the benefit of immediately helping Russia and Britain in a pinch, but if they can hold out the US can send more in US units, which I think would be a more balanced way to send help to an ally.

That way it’s not quite the same as the established convoy zone, because Russia and Britain can’t GET cash from US territory obviously (nor should they)and there would need to be convoy zones for britain that are wholly independent from the lend lease zones you speak of.

great pix craig.  nice to put faces with the names.  +1 to you.