Pacific 1940 review copy has arrived

Bummer, I think Jonas got spooked by some spam.

@cwwgateway:

Two things I noticed:

It at least looks like the canadian markers have been changed to UK (but not in the europe game pics?)

In alpha 3 there’s a fighter in Korea that isn’t here now.

The missing fighter might be a set-up error

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.

what are the flaws of p40? what are the flaws of the origial pacific?

@oztea:

id like it if a turn represented 3 months
1 turn to a season
so that seasonal rules would be simple to implement.

I see where you’re coming from, in fact, I had the same idea, try to make it simple. However, I honestly didn’t really think of seasonal board changes, I was only going for chronological comparisons.

Really awesome this came up!

Yes, this is really cool. Thanks for digging it up and posting it.

@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.

I second that, very good post.