Global Team game when it comes out!

Hello all. Just wondering if there are any custom setup charts for the Global 1942 scenario? I have the printout but was looking for setup charts to customize what I have. Thanks in advance.

That is indeed the strategy, and it relies on the allies having pretty bad luck to smash up those stacks without losing 50% of your starting planes.

Germany can replace the planes, but not at the same time as it builds mechs, armor stax
Japan has even more planes, but it needs even more than Germany does because without them, its a paper tiger.

The problem with doing these stub attacks is if you lose more than 50% of your starting air power before turn 5, you will not be able to force your victory cities and strategic objectives.  The consequences are felt several turns later (7,8), when you cant smash stax because you lost your mobile strikeforce.

What tech rules do most people use, if any, for Global games?

@Make_It_Round:

I think it is possible, however tedious, to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game, and to guess at one’s enjoyment threshold in terms of these.

It is utterly impossible to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game because each “meaningful choice” is a product of the other “meaningful choices” that were made previously. Furthermore, each “meaningful choice” is then subject to all of the possible dice outcomes, and thus multiplied by all of those possibilities and then multiplied by all of the “meaningful choices” offered by the various non-combat possibilities as they are determined by the dice outcomes. As you can see we get into these massive factorial situations where we are multiplying massive exponentials by even more massive exponentials until what is essentially infinity.

To make a comparison: In chess there are only 20 possible moves to make on the first turn. (16 pawn moves and 4 knight moves) The opponent is faced with the same. So the possible combinations for the opening 2 moves (1 each) in chess is 400. None of which are absolutely stupid. there are 8,902 possible moves by 2 each and by move 7 there are almost eleven MILLION possible positions. That’s without dice, with only 2 players, with a much much much more limited scope for unit movement, no scope for adding units and far far fewer spaces.

Now you asked about the “meaningful choices”. Some work has been done in this regard in chess and it seems that in the average game of about 30 moves (moving a single piece at at time. There are over 4.5 MILLION games outcomes in smart competitive situations. Now, multiply that by the factor of dice, multiple movement of units, game spaces, purchases and the fact that most AA games will see over 100 times that 60 units move factor and you have an utterly infinite combination of outcomes.

Which is part of the reason it is so much more entertaining than chess.

…or maybe just because we get to play with little tanks and planes.

The two games that I have finished (in one go) have lasted 13 and 15 hours respectively.  I have played 4 others in an ongoing format where we would play a turn every other day.  All of these games lasted over a week.

Well you admit to Bad Play on the part of U.K. so the case is closed.  Regardless of what had to go right for the Germans.

And no, resources don’t HAVE to be built to deal with the Japanese Navy, but the reality is 100% of the USA’s income is going into the atlantic, thereby relieving NO pressure on Germany.

A Jap navy with transports off the east coast of the U.S. or threatening australia however, would divert that 100%.  Sending a useless navy to South America was a poor decision in this game. Hinsight or not.

Just jumping in, since the water seems warm enough.

Are people trying to win as the axis militarily(meaning conventional forces/economy shifting) or by victory cities?

Just curious, cause if you don’t have to worry about future turns(by ending the game early through cities), you may be able to afford to give up certain ground and take unusual risks or losses to secure the cities in question and then see if the allies are in position to liberate one in time.

I’ve drafted and posted early ideas on unconventional strategies. One designed for Europe with a goal of 5 cities in 5 turns seemed plausible. My first live try failed, based on one particular allied response and a close battle being not close after dice were rolled. Am I giving up? Nope. I’m refining the strategy. (In this example, it is clear I must take Normandy if I permit France to produce units, as 3 carriers for the allies proved to be “a bridge to far” for the German air and naval forces.)

Epic