Which Ruleset do you use when playing Europe 1940?

thanks!

Thanks for the confirmation!!!

I looked it up. Yes, you are right. It only applies to major ICs, so a minor one could indeed be built in Finland.

@QwertGold:

Also, In Aplha3 Russia gets +9IPC instead of the 2 units, regardless of their diplomatic status with Germany, and what territories they control.

I just checked the Alpha 3 thread again and did not see this rule on there.  Can you tell me where you found this?  Thanks

@Ruanek:

@Gargantua:

Don’t ever capture paris - you’ll see why.

Advertise to your opponent, if you want to stress him out, all your “Possible angles” of attack…  all the territories you can take… he’ll likely try to underdefend everything, and forget what actually matters.

Why wouldn’t you take Paris?  It’s not really that difficult, and every turn you don’t take it you’re denying yourself France’s IPCs and letting them build up more (probably not a huge amount, but it’s so easy to stop early).

Depending on who you capture Paris with, when you do it, and when the Axis takes it back, it could be bad. For example, if Great Britain liberates France (their capital, not the other territories), Italy can ignore it. If the US doesn’t have a lot of units to reinforce it, France will collect their income of X IPCs. Then, on Germany’s turn, they can take France back, not only gaining back the income of the actual territory, but also getting all the IPCs that France is holding at that time.

here terrain rules would have made for a great addition to the game and solution to the potential problem you’re mentioning. as most of you will know the Italioan campaig lasted for two years and by the war’s end the fighting was still going on there. The mountainous terrain was ideal for defending troops and an attacker’s nightmare.if defended it would be virtually impossible to just push on to germany….

We’re at the point where we need a donation drive

Veqryn:  Help us get Global 1940 rules coded, by donating to triplea:  http://bit.ly/bJaZQF

I assume you meant to put “owned” instead of “pwned” when talking about a Barbarossa/Stalingrad game in reference to Battle of the Bulge or Guadalcanal. I agree here too. At least for me, a game such as that would probably have owned the others.

Nah, I meant “pwn”. I was using netspeak: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pwned

I think some kind of A&A Russian-front game would be the brilliant, but I don’t hold out much hope of seeing one.

I won’t continue, since I’ve made my feelings clear and this is just one of those ‘we don’t agree’ type issues. I also don’t want to sound like I wouldn’t be able to enjoy / play the game because of it, which obviously isn’t true.

However, I will still say this…

No, they’d probably, like me, not give a damn.

I think some of them, like some people here, clearly would give a damn. For that reason alone designers should take certain things into account. I don’t hold WotC in particularly high esteem, since they have a habit of short-changing the consumer on many small aspects of games which in reality would take almost no effort or cost to put right. Larry only has input which goes so far, and he has my respect. But Wizards do too many irritating things, and to me, this is just another one of them.