UK Development

Link up A&A Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940, and you've got Axis & Allies Global 1940.
Oakshield
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:45 am

Re: UK Development

Post by Oakshield » Sat Jan 15, 2011 8:30 pm

WILD BILL wrote:I don't think the UK econ was split because of capture capital rules. If UK had its entire economy to spend in London the first few rounds Sea lion wouldn't be possible anyway. I think it was more so that UK couldn't use its entire income to rebuild its navy quicker and kill Germany. It would play into a KGF/KIF strat if UK was able to completely abandon India and the Pac side of the board (especially if Japan is waiting for J3 to attack). As it is now UK gets beat up and is forced to play mostly def until the US gets involved (except maybe in the Med). If UK was able to rebound quicker (more income) then while Germany is trying to finish off Russia, they would be in jeopardy of loosing Berlin IMO.
I'm with Eagle's first view, it's time for the UK to go Global - no more UK India. When Larry split the economies he wasn't counting on the Pacific VCs you have now. If the UK ignores the Pacific then Japan doesn't wait until J3, it goes for its VCs straight away and Germany plays defence. All you have to do is limit the reaction time of India: put a minor there and another in Malaya and if they don't pump out units every turn Japan gets green light to attack (effectively what happens in the UK and Sea Lion).

It's true that then the UK wouldn't be able to ward off Sea Lion completely, and it would become a problem if London is taken and its whole economy is paralized. The solution is, as Eagle also said, changing the capital rules:
- gets sacked as it is now
- after it, if a power doesn't have ICs it goes guerilla and can only buy inf and place it in any territory - China, France - plus other units with NOs (Burma road).
- if it has ICs it can produce as normal.

The only problem is that cutting India production and giving a Malaya IC would weaken the balance you have now in the Pacific. Adjustments would have to be made, probably beefing up China. But this will never happen anyway, it's too radical a change for Larry to consider...

Caractacus
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:18 am
Location: Turku, Finland

Re: UK Development

Post by Caractacus » Sun Jan 16, 2011 5:45 am

Oakshield wrote: The solution is, as Eagle also said, changing the capital rules:
- gets sacked as it is now
- after it, if a power doesn't have ICs it goes guerilla and can only buy inf and place it in any territory - China, France - plus other units with NOs (Burma road).
- if it has ICs it can produce as normal.
I generally like the rule, but there is a problem with the logic that annoys me:
before I lost my capital, I couldn't build Infantry in 'any territory', but after I lose my capital, I can...

Many a time, I would have liked to build Infantry somewhere where there is no IC, even just 1 Inf would have been enough, but I couldn't. If I had lost my capital, I could have done. Seems odd.
Caractacus.

MarkVIIIMarc
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 4:12 pm

Re: UK Development

Post by MarkVIIIMarc » Sun Jan 16, 2011 1:11 pm

Letting a UK player spend the money wherever is a boost for the allies.

I might use this in my next game if I feel the Allies need a boost. Another good idea for a house rule. This is equal to making the french roll to determine if they go vichy, axis or pro axis as a boost to the axis

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests