@Imperious:
The only other idea to add here is this:
The Soviets can’t move or relocate the Far East border force until starting turn 4, by which Stalin knew certainly ( by spys) as an indication that Japan had decided to attack USA. He can pull this force starting on that turn, but allow it to immediately enter Moscow ( modeling the railroads that were established between these points).
That would be historical too.
Why is this rule nessisary if the game is already set-up to not reward Japan for attacking the Soviets?
I dont think what I am saying is that complicated or confusing, I am mean in 1942 it is not historical or at all likely for the Germans to invade Britian and the german command has allready canceled operation sealion, but in the AA50 1942 scenario there isnt a rule that says for the first four turns the Germans cant attack england with land units. Why? because the game already discourages that.
Likewise who cares which treaties or military plans the japanese goverment/military historically honored. The player is the leaders of the jap goverment/military.
or am I wrong?
Why is this rule necessary if the game is already set-up to not reward Japan for attacking the Soviets?
The rule is not necessary at all. However, if after playing the game you feel the allies are stronger then try it because it effects the allies and it is historical. Thats the type of solution that i find works best in balancing these games… draw on historical plausibility.
The pplayer is the leaders of the jap goverment/military.
Only after the start Date of Sept 1939. The arrangements are still in place.
these are the basic concepts that both make the game playable, historical relevant, and balanced.
I choose to address this in my design.
@Imperious:
- Martians don’t try to visit and stop the war
- Time machines are not allowed
wheres the fun in that! :lol:
idk IL, its your game if thats the way you want to have it. I think I will be playing AAG40.
In that game Larry has 18 infantry which do the same thing by other means as my own rule. He made Japan stay out by just giving Russia way too many pieces.
I just choose to make it more realistic, but i suppose adding 30 infantry might do the job too.
And i wish people just tried the game, then shooting down it because it does not allow candyland.
Hi IL
Sorry if i’m late but I found some of my books among boxes.
@Imperious:
And i wish people just tried the game, then shooting down it because it does not allow candyland.
Im sorry, i shouldnt have said that. I dont mean to shoot your game down, I only got so much cash though.
LOL…
This topic seems like a good old western movie.
IL = the good
crusader IV = the bad
Emperor taiki = and the ugly.
as long as i dont die at that end.
I’ve played more candyland games more then any other board game (other then monopoly)
Well my map can be printed from any printer on 8.5 x 11 sheets and taped together. That cant cost more than $20 in ink
as long as i dont die at that end. :-D
Oh, and I forgot, I bought a book recently….Fateful Choice by Ian Kershaw.
We understand better the fundamental differences between the Imperial navy and the army.
The choice to attack USA instead of the USSR was not so easily made as we think of it.
I’ll try the 8.5x11 thing, and those sound like some pretty intersting books crusaderiv.
IL will you ever do a global size game using your new rules. You could base it on the new G40 map but just add a neew set up and rules. I would love to see a G39. Will you be making any thing like that. :? :?
Not clear at this time.
But the AAE40 map might be reconfigured into a 1939 map depending on the final product. The of weight of this decision will be based on how accurate the OOB map is.
IL can you give me a list of parts and stuff I will need to play this. I will have G40 games and AA42. I am mostly confused on the new pieces colours.
These items are listed on the first page.
You really only need 1 each AAE40 and AAP40 and some units for fortifications ( table tactics infantry with gun cut off)
bumper
Early draught of my take on the Global map.
Includes list of neutral alignments on vital dates.
The names are based on 1939-1941 actual maps in 99% of the cases. These are cross confirmed with various other maps produced in USA and UK in this period.
Maps often lag behind official name changes, while names such as “Volgagrad” and “Belarus” by definition did not exist until long after the war.
Of course there’s nothing wrong with using names such as “Mesopotamia”, but the government of the country at the time called it “Iraq” so that’s what I prefer to go along with.
