WA in China?

[Cheesehead]

I recently invaded a Japanese occupied Chinese coastal province with 2 WA infantry. While I easily destroyed the Jap militia, and the province turned yellow (Chinese owned), my WA infantry disappeared? Is there a rule against WA forces occupying Chinese territory?

Thanks

[Wayllander]

Yes, when you retake an allies province, it is returned to that ally and your troops are returned to the closet area under your control.

--way

[Joel Billings]

Section 11.5.3 in the manual.

[Drax Kramer]

The idea about returning the liberators back to the territory they came from is generally good, but the timing of the its execution may lead to the odd events.

Wouldn't it be better for such forced repatriation of liberators to take place at the beginning of the move of the owner of the liberated territory?

For example, if Allies liberate Soviet nationality region from Germans, they would be kicked out before Soviets would have a chance to reinforce the region, thus allowing Germans to recapture it with ease.

I guess liberators would wait for Red Army and NKVD to arrive before leaving the Soviet population to tender mercies of the Gestapo.


Drax

[aletoledo]

Drax Kramer, I don't think its solely a design issue, but rather a compromise between design and complexity of the game mechanics themselevs. you can conceive of any degree of rules to acccomplish an event, but putting it into a working format sometimes can be difficult.

for example in your suggestion of allowing the liberating units to remain until the owning country returns with enougth force to hold the territory: what happens if that force never arrives? does that mean the WA has now conquered the soviet union and can claim its resources? thus further delaying any recovery of russia. So you see there are many facets to consider in the game design that can't initially be foreseen.

[5cats]

The idea of a "friendly garrison" should be easy enough to impliment.
Just have (in this example) Russian units "attack" the WA units. Regardless of the odds, the WA retreats with no damage or losses or anything. It'll cost Russia 1 supply, but then they can move/repair/strat more troops in at their leisure.
If Russia fails to re-calim it, the WA could just abandon it & then it'll do the "automatic" return to Russia. No they couldn't claim the resources etc it shouldn't be too hard to code. Besides even if they did repair stuff, it would all get broken again when Russia "attacked".
I too find it odd that the WA will liberate an area, only to have it left vacent for the enemy to re-capture with ease...

[Drax Kramer]

ORIGINAL: aletoledo

Drax Kramer, I don't think its solely a design issue, but rather a compromise between design and complexity of the game mechanics themselevs. you can conceive of any degree of rules to acccomplish an event, but putting it into a working format sometimes can be difficult.

If it were a boardgame, I'd prevent the Wallied units from ending their movement on the Soviet territory. That's how I did this in Axis&Allies. Americans could attack German controlled Caucasus (because it's moving into German territory), but could not move around Soviet controlled land.

for example in your suggestion of allowing the liberating units to remain until the owning country returns with enougth force to hold the territory: what happens if that force never arrives? does that mean the WA has now conquered the soviet union and can claim its resources? thus further delaying any recovery of russia. So you see there are many facets to consider in the game design that can't initially be foreseen.

Instead of displacing Americans from Leningrad at the end of US turn, I'd keep them there until the next Soviet turn, thus giving a chance to Soviets to reinforce their territory rather than let Germans walk in for free. Same mechanism, different timing, that's all.


Drax

[Delphinium]

Why can't you implement the A&A solution which I liked. I also don't know why WAllied troops aren't allowed in Soviet/Chinese territory. I know Stalin rejected the offers of deploying air wings in the Caucasus in 1942, but it was a feasable event, probably more so tham some of the other events that the game permits. When liberated by Allies a territory is still "controlled" by the original owner economically, so what's the problem?

[hakon]

ORIGINAL: Delphinium

Why can't you implement the A&A solution which I liked. I also don't know why WAllied troops aren't allowed in Soviet/Chinese territory. I know Stalin rejected the offers of deploying air wings in the Caucasus in 1942, but it was a feasable event, probably more so tham some of the other events that the game permits. When liberated by Allies a territory is still "controlled" by the original owner economically, so what's the problem?

To me, it is pretty obvious why Stalin did not want western soldiers in his country. Too many dangerous ideas..... China is another matter, though. Some american fighters there would be quite historical.

[Joel Billings]

This is what we have added in the soon to be released patch (hopefully late next week):

Rule Change – The Liberation rule in section 11.5.3 has been modified. Now, when a World Power successfully attacks another friendly World Powers region, the player will be asked “Occupy Area Yes/No”. If they answer no, then the effects listed in 11.5.3 will take place. If they answer yes, then they attacking player will take control of the area as they would any other region and their units will remain in the area. The area and its infrastructure will now function as if they belong to the occupying World Power. Any population and factories in these occupied areas may be used by the occupying World Power using the factories normal factory multiplier. Example: Germany has taken Leningrad. The Western Allies successfully attack it and answer Yes to the Occupy Area question. They now control Leningrad and if they repair the factory there it will provide the standard Soviet multiplier (x2 or x3, not x1) under a Production for Soviet Union section in the Western Allies production screen (using population in Western Allied controlled Russian nationality areas).



The one thing I see missing in this rule is the ability to give back the areas to the original ownerHowever it should make it much harder for one World Power to block out another World Power from taking back areas originally owned by a third World Power. This fix was something our system was able to handle fairly easily. Thanks to the person that posted the Y/N occupation idea in the first place (I've forgotten where I read that, but it was here somewhere on the forum).

[hakon]

This sure solves the problems the Wester allies would be seeing when trying to liberate Chinese and Russian territory.

Btw, did you consider the effect this could have in china? 3 english factories in China would be a big problem for Japan.... (Btw, would the english factories produce every turn, or just 1 out of 3?)

[Joel Billings]

Good question which I don't know the answer to. Depends on if the factories are limited because they are Chinese nationality or because they are Chinese World Power. My guess is because they are Chinese nationality so they would produce as if they were Chinese. 10 points to the first person that finds the answer to this question.