europe seems so lackluster.
AAE40 setup ( now verified)
-
This is completely true and further proof that the research to at least make the games seem realistic was not considered. This is the whole point of the recent discussion regarding the AAP40 set up issues and changes being made. Its like the old adage of telling a lie and then trying to cover it with yet another lie. Eventually the whole deck of cards crashes down under its own weight because the original foundation is faulty and now you get into situations where you got to ‘fix’ what others have already worked on because they started in the wrong place.
Here Here! This game should be set up exactly to the T how it actually was in 1940. Then the should just give the axis the forces they would have needed to make it a fair game. nothing else should be altered. No subtracting here and then adding there and then counter this to offset that…
-
then it would be a different game, and not axis and allies
-
@Imperious:
I have the historical information to set them both up realistically and will be doing this. But you have to at least play AAE40 and global 40 to see what they did.
IL, I am not totally familiar with your developed games, so tell me if you already do this, but… could you or would you be willing to examine a historical setup scheme for the base Global 40 board?
What I mean by that is, if we just wanted to play with the boards, and game rules, as they come in the boxes, but have a more historical and balanced setup…
I know you modify the boards and modify the game on your own (I have downloaded some), but would you be willing to design/playtest a setup scheme for the base game?
-
I don’t see 3 bombers in Central USA in the setup nor in the screenshots from DJensen.
It’s hard to tell but I don’t think it says bombers in the US setup chart. And in the test game from DJensen there is one shot from the Eastern USA building up where there is only one bomber in the Eastern USA. Probably (we don’t know the political rules exactly) because USA can enter any other territories than her own.
-
There are bombers in the Central US. However it may be 1 now that I looked at it.
-
setups from http://www.axisandallies.org/node/416
Italy 10 IPC:
Albania: 2 Infantry, 1 Tank
Ethiopia: 2 Infantry
Italian Somaliland: 1 Infantry
Libya:2 Infantry
Northern Italy: 2 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 1 Tank, 1 AA Gun, 1 Fighter, 1 Major IC, 1 Air Base
Southern Italy: 2 Infantry, 1 AA Gun, 1 Fighter, 1 Minor IC, 1 Naval Base
Tobruk:4 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 2 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Tank
Sea Zone 95: 1 Cruiser, 1 Battleship, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 97: 1 Destroyer, 1 Cruiser, 1 TransportUnited States 35 IPC:
Central USA: 1 Infantry, 1 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Bomber, 1 Major IC
Eastern USA:1 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter, 1 Major IC, 1 Air Base, 1 Naval Base
Sea Zone 108:1 Destroyer, 1 TransportFrance 17 IPC:
Algeria: 1 Infantry
Normandy/Bordeaux: 1 Infantry, 1 Minor IC, 1 Naval Base
French West Africa:1 Infantry
France: 6 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter, 1 Major IC, 1 Air Base
United Kingdom: 1 Infantry
Morocco: 1 Infantry
Southern France:1 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Naval Base
Syria:1 Infantry
Tunisia:1 Infantry
Sea Zone 72:1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 93:1 Destroyer, 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 112: 1 CruiserSoviet Union 28 IPC:
Archangel:1 Infantry
Baltic States: 3 Infantry
Belarus: 1 Infantry
Bessarabia: 2 Infantry
Caucasus: 1 Infantry
Eastern Poland: 3 Infantry
Karelia: 2 Infantry
Novgorod: 6 Infantry 1 Artillery, 1 AA Gun, 1 Fighter, 1 Minor IC, 1 Air Base, 1 Naval Base
Russia: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Fighter, 1 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Tank, 1 AA Gun, 1 Tactical Bomber, 1 Major IC, 1 Air Base
Volgograd: 1 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Tank, 1 Minor IC
Vyborg: 2 Infantry
Western Ukraine:1 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Sea Zone 115:1 Battleship, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 127: 1 SubmarineGermany 30 IPC:
Denmark: 1 Infantry
Greater Southern Germany: 6 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 2 Tanks
Germany: 6 Infantry, 4 Artillery, 1 AA Gun, 1 Bomber, 1 Minor IC
Holland/Belgium: 4 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 3 Tanks, 1 Fighter
Norway: 2 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Poland: 3 Infantry, 1 Tank
Romania: 2 Infantry, 1 Tank
Slovakia/Hungary: 2 Infantry, 1 Tank
West Germany: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 4 Mechanized Infantry, 1 AA gun, 2 Fighters, 3 Tactical Bombers, 1 Major IC, 1 Air Base, 1 Naval Base
Sea Zone 103: 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 108: 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 113: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 117: 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 118: 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 124: 1 SubmarineUnited Kingdom 29 IPC:
Alexandria:2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter
Anglo Egypt Sudan: 1 Infantry
Egypt: 1 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Naval Base
France: 1 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank
Gibraltar:1 Air Base, 1 Naval Base
Iceland: 1 Air Base
New Brunswick: 1 Naval Base
Ontario:1 Infantry
Quebec:1 Infantry, 1 Tank, 1 Minor IC
United Kingdom: 1 Infantry, 1 AA Gun, 3 Fighters, 1 Major IC, 1 Air Base, 1 Naval Base
Union of South Africa: 2 Infantry, 1 Minor IC, 1 Naval Base
West India: 1 Infantry
Sea Zone 71:1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 85: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 91: 1 Destroyer 1 Aircraft Carrier, 1 Tactical Bomber
Sea Zone 98:1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 106:1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 109:1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 110: 1 Destroyer, 1 Battleship
Sea Zone 111: 1 Cruiser, 1 Battleship
Sea Zone 112: 1 Cruiser -
I love the new scale of ships in Pac and Euro! I’m so used to Revised where a nation has MAYBE 7-10 ships at max. Now several powers start the game with 7-10! :-D
-
I am so freaking excited to play this game and the set up looks awesome, but I am getting sick of all those history buffs who say the set-up isn’t historical. I want a set up that is fun to play, which is what Larry is providing. If they made this game historical then the allies would win every time. Gamers seriously stop the whining.
-
I am so freaking excited to play this game and the set up looks awesome, but I am getting sick of all those history buffs who say the set-up isn’t historical. I want a set up that is fun to play, which is what Larry is providing. If they made this game historical then the allies would win every time. Gamers seriously stop the whining.
make me :x
-
I am so freaking excited to play this game and the set up looks awesome, but I am getting sick of all those history buffs who say the set-up isn’t historical. I want a set up that is fun to play, which is what Larry is providing. If they made this game historical then the allies would win every time. Gamers seriously stop the whining.
Much of the “whining” is going on because we are skeptical of game balance, not simply because it may not be historical.
While the game should be as historically accurate as possible, I think most of us would welcome tweaking with unit placements/amounts to even out the matchup in the long run. Otherwise it might not usually be “fun to play”, as you put it.
-
From the looks of things this game will be very balanced with a slight edge to the Allies.
-
Those scaling issues are very disappointing. However, I don’t think they’re that hard to fix. The main problem is the Pacific setup has waaaay too much aircrafts although the scaling of navies seems totally correct. (Brits have more destroyers and cruisers in Europe than Japan and as many battleships.) And maybe a few infantries can be removed in some spots of the Pacific map (like Malaya) but it’s not as much necessary IMO. Basically removing half the japanese airpower (14 aircrafts is enough) would make the setup much better. Most of allied aircrafts should be removed too (why does ANZAC has 4 fighters?!? 1 would be enough) along with about half of the three very ugly 6 infantries piles in eastern Russia. I tried this and I was able to get very nice and much more “credible” global setup on a historical point of view by removing exactly the same IPC values in units on both sides. Is it balanced? I don’t know but as far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t look bad…
-
@San:
Those scaling issues are very disappointing. However, I don’t think they’re that hard to fix. The main problem is the Pacific setup has waaaay too much aircrafts although the scaling of navies seems totally correct. (Brits have more destroyers and cruisers in Europe than Japan and as many battleships.) And maybe a few infantries can be removed in some spots of the Pacific map (like Malaya) but it’s not as much necessary IMO. Basically removing half the japanese airpower (14 aircrafts is enough) would make the setup much better. Most of allied aircrafts should be removed too (why does ANZAC has 4 fighters?!? 1 would be enough) along with about half of the three very ugly 6 infantries piles in eastern Russia. I tried this and I was able to get very nice and much more “credible” global setup on a historical point of view by removing exactly the same IPC values in units on both sides. Is it balanced? I don’t know but as far as I’m concerned, it doesn’t look bad…
I agree the setup should have some resemblance to historical reality, and the 2 halves of the game should be compatible.
The Allies did have a huge, huge army at Singapore in 1940, so I think that’s OK.
There was no BB at Singapore in 1940. They didn’t arrive until 1941, from what I looked up.Removing half of Jap planes might be a bit drastic, but I agree they seem to have way too many, and ANZAC surely shouldn’t have 4.
Have heard complaints that 18 Russian infantry out east isn’t right - should be more mechanized, etc……
-
WE together should come up with a historical 1940 setup once both come out. The people who made it didn’t look up any facts regarding who had what and where. Balancing does not have to only be a function of the set up.
After a time i will make an entirely new map based on these with a more credible set up. But first we should study the prospect of a historical setup.
One thing immediately that seems missing is the rule for Japan on her first turn of DOW where all allied ships defend at 1. This was a good rule in AAP and made a huge difference to address the compensation of extra japanese pieces.
-
@Imperious:
WE together should come up with a historical 1940 setup once both come out. The people who made it didn’t look up any facts regarding who had what and where. Balancing does not have to only be a function of the set up.
But first we should study the prospect of a historical setup.
Sounds good! I understand it is possible to be TOO historically set up (since various geographical barriers and the Russian winter, etc. are not simulated), but I’m sure a lot of us agree that this 1940 game needs to be set up a lot CLOSER to historical reality than it is.
From what I was researching last week about military positions in the Pacific in 1940, the P40 game setup leaves a LOT to be desired. I’m afraid I agree with IL that they apparently didn’t look up any facts regarding who had what and where, based on the knowledge I do have of military positions in 1940, and based on what research I did last week to check on whether an all out J attack in 1940 really did have all those juicy targets. (Answer - “no”)
Personally, I’m not really interested in a perfectly historical setup. But I would like to see the top 10 (for example) most egregious misrepresentations remedied!! Starting with my own pet peeve - there wasn’t a single battleship at Singapore in 1940!
Lead the charge, IL! -
Yea you START with historical and then tweak with balancing the game. I know for a fact that adding 30 japanese planes could not have been any result from any historical starting point.
Rubbish. Pure Rubbish.
We will get the job done right 100%
I will start the study of the AAP40 map and have something in a week or so. From this starting point ( based entirely on historical) you guys address the balancing phase. First is to show it as it should be.
-
I’m with you guys. First let’s design a new setup for the global game using the original map. 1) It should be realistic. 2) It should be at least “somewhat historically accurate”. 3) Scale should not be too much unbalanced knowing that 100% scale balance is not possible. 4) Army strengths in the setup should not only represent numbers but also quality, terrain, leadership and even opportunism. 5) It should be balanced (this is the hardest part I guess…) 6) Finally, it should be fun.
Rock on!
-
Spain has 6 infantry and Turkey has 8.
So Spain would be harder to capture, but not impossible.
I have already formed the information on land sea air OOB for June 1940. I will post just what the facts say in terms of totals, then we can decide placement etc…
-
@Imperious:
Spain has 6 infantry and Turkey has 8.
So Spain would be harder to capture, but not impossible.
I have already formed the information on land sea air OOB for June 1940. I will post just what the facts say in terms of totals, then we can decide placement etc…
Haha - sweet. We’re working on improving on the game weeks before it’s released. :-D
We’re waiting right here for your next post, IL. Will be interesting to see historical numbers next to OOB setup….
I know the Germans destroyed like half of Russia’s airforce on the first offensive, because they were grounded and not expecting German attack. IIRC Russia had the largest army in the world before the German attack, and had a tremendous number of aircraft…
Anyway - can’t wait to see some stats. Might start working on obtaining them myself…
-
OK then here are some figures:
Ship Type BB CV CA DD SS AP Fighter T Bomber
Germany 1 1 2 2 1
Italy 2 2 3 3 1
Japan 3 2 3 5 2 4
UK 4 2 4 8 2 6
USSR 1 1 1 1
France 2 2 3 3 1
Anzac 1
USA 3 2 3 8 4 6
Spain 1 1
Argentina 1
Brazil 1
Turkey
Dutch 1BB 3
CV 4
CA 10
DD 20
SS 30
AP
FIGHTER
T BOMBER
BOMBERhttp://www.members.tripod.com/~marcin_w/index-soam.html
http://ww2f.com/north-africa-mediterranean/27491-turkey-ww2.html
http://members.tripod.com/marcin_w/index-2.html
http://ww2total.com/WW2/History/Orders-of-Battle/Great-Britain/British-and-Empire-Armies-September-1939.htmby the end of 1940 Bulgaria had around 300 combat aircraft,
In spring of 1941, the mobilized Bulgarian armed forces consisted of 16 infantry divisions, two cavalry divisions, one motorized brigade, seven air regimentsOrganisation: In May 1940, the French Army on the north-east front, which stretched from Switzerland to the North Sea, was divided into the 1st and 2nd Army Groups and the 7th Army.
These forces comprised:
• 63 infantry divisions (of which 30 were regular) ;
• 7 motorised infantry divisions;
• 3 armoured divisions;
• 3 light mechanised divisions;
• 5 cavalry divisions;
• 13 fortress divisions.
• The general reserve comprised a further 17 infantry, 2 motorised and 3 armoured divisions.
French Air Force
The Air Force had suffered considerable neglect between the wars, and its performance in 1940, with machines which were in general much inferior to those of the enemy, was not impressive. Indeed, according to French sources, only 420 modern fighters and 31 heavy bombers were serviceable when the Germans struck in May.
Total French front line strength on 10 May 1940 was 1,604 aircraft (764 fighters, 260 bombers, 180 reconaissance planes, 400 liaison aircrafts).
Total strenght of the French Air Force together with Aviation Colonaile: 1,200 fighters, 800 reconaissance planes, 1,300 bombers.
Equipment of Luftwaffe First Line Units on September 1, 1939
Aircraft Strength
He111 bombers
780
Do17 bombers
470
Do17 reconaissance 280
Ju88 bombers
20
Ju87 dive-bombers
335
Bf109D fighters
235
Bf109E fighters
850
Bf110 destroyers
195
Ar66 fighters 5
Ar68 fighters 35
Hs126 tactical reconaissance 195
He46 tactical reconaissance 100
Coastal aircrafts 205
Miscellaneous 65
Total 3,960Approximate organisation strength of the major types of the German Army divisions in 1939:
Infantry Division motorised Infantry Division Mountain Division Panzer Division Light Division
Units total 87 4 3 5 4
Officers 500 500 ? 400 400
Officials 100 100 ? 100 100
NCOs 2,500 2,500 ? 2,000 1,600
Privates 13,400 13,400 ? 9,300 8,700
Total men 16,500
(35 divisions from first wave 18,000) 16,500 ? 11,800 10,800
Infantry Regiments 3 with 3,000 men each 3 with 3,000 men each 2 with 3,000 men each 2 with 3,000 men each 1 or 2 with 2,000 or 3,000 men each
Machine guns MG34
500 500 220 220 460
Mortars 140
(54 x 8.1cm, others 5cm) 140
(54 x 8.1cm, others 5cm) 90 50 60
Infantry guns 25
(6 x 15cm, others 7.5cm) 25
(6 x 15cm, others 7.5cm) 14
(2 x 15cm, 12 x 7.5cm) 10 10
AT Pak 3,7 cm
75 75 48
(6 x 4.7cm) 50 50
Howitzers and guns 48
(12 x 15cm, others 10.5cm leFH)
48
(12 x 15cm, others 10.5cm leFH)
32
(16 x 7.5cm, 8 x 10.5cm leFH, 8 x 15cm) 28 24
(10.5cm leFH)AA Flak 2 cm
12 12 12 12 12
Armored Cars 3 30 - 100 100
Tanks - - - 324 86
Trucks 500 1,700 - 1,400 1,400
Cars 400 1,000 - 560 600
Motorcycles 500 1,300 - 1,300 1,100
Sidecars 200 600 - 700 600
Horses 5,000 - ? - -
Horse-drawn carriages 1,000Basic British Army units:
Infantry Division (motorised) Armoured Division
Total units 25 1
Infantry brigades 3 with 2,340 men and 99 officers each 2 battalions with 1,560 men and 66 officers together
Total men 13,600 ?
Artillery 36 x 18 pounders, 36 x 4.5inch Howitzers or 18/25 pounders ?
Anti-tank guns 75
(2 pounders or 25mm) ?
Tanks 28 light tanks, 44 Universal Bren carriers 104 cruiser tanks, 20 scout carsBritish Forces total:
897,000 men, 26 divisions, 1,146 tanks, about 2,600 guns
1,911 planes (747 fighters, 871 bombers)
15 capital ships, 6 aircraft carriers, 61 cruisers, 181 destroyers, 59 submarinesThe peacetime strength of the Japanese army was 17 divisions.
By 1940 it had 2 divisions in Japan and Korea, 12 in Manchuria and 27 in China (total 41 divisions).
Even in 1943 the commitment in China still amounted to 25 infantry divisions, 1 armoured division, 11 mixed brigades, 1 cavalry brigade and 1 flying division - a total of 620,000 men and 14,000 vehicles. This force, known as the Kwantung Army, was called upon to provide a constant stream of reinforcements for the Pacific War, and by 1945 its units were understrength and too weak to pose any real threat.
The Manchurian Army proper in 1939 had a strength of some 75,000 men in infantry and cavalry units.
Basic Japanese fighting units:
Infantry Division Armoured Division Army Amphibious Brigade Navy Naval Landing Force
Total units 40 1 ? ?
Infantry regiments 3
(aprox. 2,500 officers and men each) 1 brigade
(3,800 officers and men) 3 battalions with 3,200 officers and men 2,000 officers and men
Cavalry regiments 1
(950 officers and men) - - -