Charts, game aids for Alpha 3?

Hi ANZAC.  For the HBG 1939 map, think of a 4x8 sheet of plywood.  Its is HUGE and awesome.  You need a big room for that size table plus room to walk around on all 4 sides.  I only played the 1939 game one time and I can say it is definitely superior in a hundred different ways, but playing it is an order of magnitude more complex than global 1940.  Global 1940 seems like the kiddie game next to it, which is nuts because global 1940 is not an easy game by any means.  I’d say your best bet is to get the global 1940 if only for the pieces, and then blow the extra money for the 1939 map and elite pieces if and when you and your crew outgrow it.  Another option is to play 1940 on this site with triplea.

@ErwinRommel:

Strategy should be simple: send every units possible to London, dont try anything fishy ;)
And send Australian fighters to India. (possible russians fighters if that will make the big difference)

And buy some art if you expect germany going to Scotland, when they do you hit them hard for a round or 2 (but dont win, just do damage)

Thanks
A simple post leads to the question of how….the length of the post is to explain how.

I can do simple and vague.

all units London and surrounding sz, kill German navy, reinforce India with a few Russians, save Africa, and use the Anzac as effectively as possible.

Thank you for the productive post

I still can’t believe this game is not yet in beta. It’s been too long. I blame this forum.

@BigBadBruce:

You mean you typed a set of rules with OOB rules and this link?
http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4167

My group and I never play the Europe or Pacific games on their own, just together as Global. We became constantly frustrated when reffering to 2 different manuals for a rule clarification, not to mention a print out of the latest Alpha modifications. So, I began a cut and paste project that combined both manuals, while adding and deleteing changes made after Alpha+2. Even though I am giving away copies of my document, I can’t post it here due to copy right issues.

I do not like the idea of having Japan need all those territories for an NO.  There are so many avenues of attack, it seems hard to imagine Japan getting the NO for more than a round and if they did, then they would be in a position that they would not need it.

I feel it may be a better solution if Japan were to have an NO for Hong Kong (Kwangtung), Manilla (Philippines) and Kiangsu (Beijing).  The problem is, those are all victory cities, so wouldn’t Japan already be going for those?

Maybe Alaska would be better, since Japan actually did invade Alaska (Aluetian Islands) historically.

Right - good clarification.

i think it is a great idea larry.

it helps balance the game by making it easier for axis to win and it has the added benefit of helping to reduce all usa cash being diverted against one axis power.

for those worrying about realism, there is plenty to worry about, but this is just as realistic as any other rule.