FLYER FOR 2ND EDITION E40 AND P40 IS OUT- SEPTEMBER 18TH, 2012

@krieghund said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

@andrewaagamer said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

Two ways to look at this:

Reason A is dominant and supersedes and cancels any other Reason. (Which leads to your ruling) Reason A is limited to the Soviet/Japan conflict and does not override Reason B which leads to my statement.

The first way is correct, as indicated by the phrase, “In all other respects and for all other purposes”.

Ahhh, I didn’t put enough emphasis on “In all other respects and for all other purposes”. That makes more sense to me now.

The tipping point for me is if Reason A is dominant than if any other Allied Power rather than Russia, (US, UK, ANZAC or France), attacks Mongolia, Mongolia WOULD NOT turn Pro-Axis. This goes against every other instance regarding Neutrality in the rules. A standard is if a Neutral is attacked it becomes Pro to the opposing factions.

Yes, that’s true, but Mongolia is an exceptional case. Its ties to the USSR against Japan are so strong that an attack upon it by another Allied power would not change its stance to pro-Axis, and it would remain strict neutral. The same is true if an Allied power attacks another strict neutral.

Wow - that’s cool. THANKS for explaining that!!!

There were no changes to the treatment of neutrals in general, but the Soviet-Mongolian Defense Pact was added in the 2nd Edition.

@calvinhobbesliker Japan_1942_NO.png Germany_1942_NO.png Russia_1942_NO.png Italy_1942_NO.png UK_India_1942_NO.png France_1942_NO.png China_1942_v1_NO.png ANZAC_1942_NO.png US_1942_NO.png

@calvinhobbesliker:

Thanks, guys. I have played some G40 1st edition/Alpha a few years ago, but I haven’t played any A&A since then, so my memory of the rules is a bit rusty. Did subs have 2 attack, 1 defense in G40 1st edition? I recall that they used to have 2 attack, 2 defense at some point…

They have 2A/1D in both editions.

Thank you very much Young. I’ll follow your advice. Would you recommend using your home rules (national objectives and R&D) also to complete newbies?

If UK attacks and does not finish the standing army off, the standing army stays there.

I generally represent such a scenario with French units atop of chips as the French are the least utilized army.

If the Axis then moves in, you would represent all units there with the Axis nation that claims the remaining standing army.  So in example:

UK attacks Turkey and has to retreat after killing 4 units.
Put 1 French Inf atop of the remaining units (3, I think?)
Italy then moves in and claims Turkey.
Remove the French INF, place an Italian INF atop the chips.  They now move and act as Italian units.

Pretty sure that is how the scenario would work.  Just remember that claiming neutral standing armies is part of the NCM phase, so those units in Turkey can only defend until the subsequent Italian turn.

New record, 24 minutes and 2 seconds! :-D
I’m glad you found it.

@CWO:

@Whitshadw:

Again I love the idea but the way they set it up looks like a 8 year old picked the colors and the map needs a incredible update.

I have a copy of Superpowers, and frankly the only thing about it that I really like are the little white missile sculpts, which I use as A&A atomic bombs.  (I put them horizontally in small plastic stands that I pulled from a different game.)  There are just eight of them, and considering that they came as part of a whole game with lots of other sculpts (none of which I use), this reflects nicely the rarity and high cost of WWII atomic weapons.

Back around the 1980s or so, there was a WWIII-themed global game called Supremacy.  It had some cool features, but it eventually faded from the scene, apparently because of two flaws: a simplistic economic model that could easily be manipulated, and a tendency to “go nuclear” that would end the game (the same kind of problem mentioned by rjpeters).

Funny. I too pretty much bought the game for parts originally and I thought of using the map for my own game idea.