League Global 1940 2nd edition non-ranked Team Tournament

[crockett36]

@Stucifer said in League Global 1940 2nd edition non-ranked Team Tournament:

I have picked @mikawagunichi’s brain quite a bit and played live with him. @crockett36 fancy playing this team round with me?

Yes, of course!

[gamerman01]

You are now paired up on the signup sheet.
We have 6 so far and will not start until we have at least 8.

I’ll wait a little longer before I try recruiting.

[gamerman01]

Posted siren’s call on League discussion thread just now

[gamerman01]

While waiting for 2 more participants, I’d like you to consider my proposed starting setup for a 2v2

Allies are further handicapped by lack of coordination.
Not that we are trying for a perfectly balanced game, it’s about the fun, not the end result so much.

In a 1v1, players tend to bid between 40 and 60 IPCs to add to the board for the Allies.

Slow down the Japs, make it a little more realistic, maybe
I think we can take off

fighter removed from Okinawa,
tactical removed from Japan

Add
Infantry to Chahar
Infantry to Anhwe
Infantry to Hopei
Infantry to India

And Europe handicap

Add
DD to 101
Infantry to Egypt
DD to 91
DD to 110
Transport to SAF (71)
Infantry to Ukraine
Infantry to Russia
Fighter to East Poland - Germany destroyed 2000 planes in a single day, June 22, 1941. The game starts in 1940.

That’s 83 if you’re counting, but not where any player would put a 83 bid, so is not as powerful as a discretionary strategic 83 but strong enough to reasonably balance the sides.

[gamerman01]

Here’s how AI synthesized my setup ideas, just for fun

🛡 G40 2v2 Variant: Coordinated Resistance

A historical balance tweak for two-player teams in Axis & Allies Global 1940

📜 Purpose

This variant addresses inherent coordination challenges in Allied 2v2 team formats. Since Germany and Japan benefit from more focused strategic alignment, this proposal introduces modest unit boosts for the Allies to reflect historical deployments, improve survivability, and sustain competitive pacing.

---

🎲 Setup Adjustments

Each change adheres to the “1 unit per territory/zone” guideline.

🌊 Pacific Theater

Nation	Territory/Zone	Unit Change	Historical Rationale
Japan	Okinawa	-1 fighter	Reduces excessive early air mobility
Japan	Japan (home)	-1 tactical bomber	Streamlines complexity, balances air power
China	Chahar	+1 infantry	Represents local resistance and rearguard
China	Anhwe	+1 infantry	Delays Axis advance toward central China
China	Hopei	+1 infantry	Strengthens northern front line
UK (Pacific)	India	+1 infantry	Helps sustain Burma Road defense

🌍 Europe Theater

Nation	Territory/Zone	Unit Change	Historical Rationale
UK	SZ 101	+1 destroyer	Bolsters Atlantic convoy defense
UK	Egypt	+1 infantry	Reinforces defense against Italy
UK	SZ 91	+1 destroyer	Slows Italian fleet mobility
UK	SZ 110	+1 destroyer	Adds protection vs German naval threat
UK	SZ 71 (S. Africa)	+1 transport	Enhances reach into East Africa / India
USSR	Ukraine	+1 infantry	Bolsters defense on Dnieper front
USSR	Russia (Moscow)	+1 infantry	Strategic depth for capital defense
USSR	East Poland	+1 fighter	Reflects pre-Barbarossa Soviet air presence

---

🧠 Gameplay Rationale

• Historical Anchoring: Each unit placement references plausible pre-June 1940 deployments or logistical positioning.
• Balance Correction: Enhances Allied survivability without nullifying Axis initiative.
• Team Dynamics: Supports distributed Allied coordination across two players, mitigating decision friction.

---

📝 Submission Notes

This variant was inspired by recurring imbalances in competitive 2v2 matchups and aligns with existing tournament bid frameworks (40–60 IPCs typical). It’s designed to remain compatible with official rules, requiring only setup tweaks rather than structural overhaul.

[Booper]

@gamerman01

Very cool concept. I had always just thought we’d do the tried and tested bidding for Allies, but open to new ideas. How were you envisioning sides be chosen, coin flip? Or do we run it 2x, each team plays 2 games swapping sides the 2nd time?

My initial thought on the setup, is subtracting the 2 planes from Japan may have a bigger impact than anticipated. Japan usually just needs to buy Carriers to defend the Pacific, but lacking the planes will be costlier early on.

[crockett36]

I love it. Doesn’t wreck the initial Allied disaster. Yet strengthens operation ricochet.

[crockett36]

The current bid system is stale, historically inaccurate and spoils the brilliance of Larry’s set.

I have issues with Larry’s set up. Japan is really on a 41 war footing. Germany should be completely concentrated on taking France and not ending up in a 4 year stalemate. France could be strengthened with 6 more infantry, 1 fighter, 1 anti-aircraft. 93 with a sub.

I love what you did Gamerman01!

The other possibility 10 more infantry for Russia, 6 more China. 6 more Britian (2 in London, Africa, Asia).

[gamerman01]

Thanks guys!! Means a lot

I’d say coin flip unless one side objects, then they could bid starting off that set up I put out there, but it’s not a very competitive little tournament so coin flip is encouraged.

@Booper You are not the first to tell me that Japan needs every single plane they start with so you are in very good company! (I mean in times past, not others commenting on this tournament setup)

If I don’t take away those planes, I’d be adding about 20 more to the Allies, albeit not necessarily in the most strategic spots. Some people hate the idea of taking anything off the board for starting setups, I understand.

I am not one of those people. But if you’d like to propose an alternative to two less Japanese planes (they have like 19 + 2 bombers?!) I did put this out there for ideas.

Thank you for being patient, guys, we’ll get 2 more and then could start. I’m not in the arm-twisting phase yet. Feel free to recruit.

[crockett36]

@gamerman01 i’m from Allied headquarters so take the planes

[gamerman01]

I wanted to take more.