I’m still not sure that this aspect of the tech discussion belongs here since it is more about a house rule but I mentioned how we have developed a progressive valued chart for the techs but I didn’t give the limitations of attaining the tech. A tech die is three (3) IPC’s every tern a player wants to roll for a tech. A neutral nation can roll one die only per rounf thatthey are neutral. That is three IPC’s per round. If a tech has a R&D value of 25, it may take a nation at least 5 rounds to develop that tech. That is at least 15 IPC’s in order to develop a tech. A nation that is war may invest in three dice (9IPC’s) per rounf in order to develop three different tech.'s at a time. They can not be applied to a single tech but must be spread over the three techs to be develpoed. It can get expensive but the thought process is this; a country will invest in R&D to develop a specific technology. It will not just through money at a problem and randomly hope to get a good result….governments maybe but not gamers. If and when we play with technology, I prefer this R&D chart. The Anniversary/Global chart and dice costs can definately thow the balance of the game off. Last game I played of global 1940, theAmerican player shelled out alot of IPC’s on tech. It put his production behind and the other allied player had to really hold on for the US to catch up but the US player was able to develop long range heavy bombers and cheaper ships. It was devostating to the the axis player (me) because he then went dark skies on the axis and it became a war of attrition that I could not repulse effectively. I have to take this moment to say I love Narvik. Direct and to the point. Tech is fun sometimes but there is alot to just playing the game.
Japan & Germany Turn 3
-
With the newest rules, could one do a turn 3 India and UK sack with Germany and Japan? I haven’t looked at the board in so long since box rules.
-
For India, you are way out of position afterwards and the allies will be all over the dutch islands n such, not counting china. As for Europe, a smart UK player can easily hold a turn 3 sealion. Turn 4 sealion though, is usually 100% guaranteed for germany. Here is the thing, Japan needs to declare round 2 to crush india by turn 3, this means that US can set up in gib and fly bombers to london turn 2 if needed.
-
Way out of position with Japan?? You just sacked India with extra income to slam back east, it’s only 1 turn away to the money islands.
I’ve done pleanty of Sealions in the boxed version with Germany turn 3, what changed to make turn 3 sealion hard??
Is it good strat to have America take Spain for a 2 turn transport chain?
Can America take Suriname before @ war b/c it’s dutch?
-
Way out of position with Japan?? You just sacked India with extra income to slam back east, it’s only 1 turn away to the money islands.
I’ve done pleanty of Sealions in the boxed version with Germany turn 3, what changed to make turn 3 sealion hard??
Is it good strat to have America take Spain for a 2 turn transport chain?
Can America take Suriname before @ war b/c it’s dutch?
1. Yes, your air and navy cant hurt the allies fleet as they move on phil, carol. Your income won’t be too high since you wont have all the dutch islands (maybe around 60/65). Taking india turn 3 also drains your land and air resources fairly well which leaves china in a decent position.
2. Uk has a good deal more starting land units on it now plus the aa guns have been changed. If the UK buys strong defense and makes sure he has air in range to be home Uk2, then Germany won’t have nearly enough to turn 3 sealion. Remember Germany needs to send a plane or 2 to the landing seazone to prevent a scramble unless UK did not repair his airfield if it was bombed the previous turn. This in combination of the US being able to fly in bombers for fodder on US2, means turn 3 sealion is VERY HARD if UK did not screw up his first 2 rounds.
3. It is not bad if you are fine with the other true neutrals falling into axis hands because you attacked spain.
4. Surname is dutch, which means only UK and ANZAC can claim it. The US can only claim surname if it is at war, and if an axis power has taken it first.
-
3. It is not bad if you are fine with the other true neutrals falling into axis hands because you attacked spain
Is it a viable tactic people here on the boards use?
-
Personally I think that’s very earlier to make an attack on the neutrals, Give’s the axis a big boost moving into Turkey.
-
Thought switzerland had 2 infantry only.
It is a viable strategy if and only if you have an attack on turkey at the same time. However one big drawback is if you ever lose spain you just gave up gibraltar. Also it does require consistent investment in the atlantic if you want to shuffle units over there.
-
Yes lots of free units and stuff you got to deal with.
-
The Axis are much better suited for a neutral crush: things have to be going very well for USSR or they will get pounded by the extra infantry from Sweden and Turkey. Same for UK in the mideast.
-
You guys make valid points. Here’s the catch 22 on the whole thing though, it takes so damn long for the USA to get troops on to europe, that… by the time there’s a train of TT that takes 3 turns to get there, Germany is finishing up Russia.
Think about it though, USA can effectively be on Europe, turn 4, taking Spain and Brazil. You have to think about, in the long run, having USA presence is worth the extra troops axis picks up. But they are just infrantry, it’s not like they get fighters or tanks for taking them.
Right :?
-
I thought you couldn’t blitz through neutrals?
-
I thought you couldn’t blitz through neutrals?
I assume he meant after turkey was claimed.
Suggested Topics
