HBG's Global War 1939 FAQ

I based off what they pretty much had at peak of war. I didn’t do the 1 piece equals so many. I just made it like Uk 6 BB and spread them out. US I had 7 BB but reduced it to 5. 4 damaged in Hawaii at start of game. If it had like real 4 light cruisers and 2 h cruisers I just made that 2 normal cruisers and 2 more normal cruisers. To eliminate the 3 diff pieces. Everything else straight up with tweaks to setup as we played the game.
Yes the eastern front setup is more like spring of 41 than dec. 41 like pac is. based on the game balance and timing to work
Out. As u see the battle of the Atlantic is at its peak too. More like dec 41 there. Only issue in most games if not all is the d day invasions. Most happen before June of 44 in all games but to get correct US wouldn’t attack Europe until turn 7 or 8 with torch happening sooner
That would be a major setup change and year of turns.
I have my own map for game too.

@Royal:

See now this is interesting, because I’m playing Germany, and I don’t have nearly enough troops to get through Russia. It’s 1942, and I’m basically trying to hold onto the, what I call, “Leningrad line.” I built a lot of infantry, which in the end caused tons of problems because They simply can’t get to the front line fast enough. Don’t get me wrong, I make about 80 IPP’s, but I don’t have the mechanized power to keep the Russians at bay. What they have done is basically let me have everything, and stacked artillery and Militia in Moscow and Stalingrad, making them unreasonable to even try to attack. I don’t know what to do! America is just about to enter the war and throw roughly 10 transports at my door. Italy is doing well owning all of Africa, but Japan never did well and China and is basically 3 years behind the ballpark. I could start buying strategic bombers, but it seems like carpet bombing is a waste, even with heavy bombers.

That brings me to a question that I would like to have input on for everyone who is reading this Forum (Thanks by the way, I really needed some feedback like this!) Carpet bombing only hits on a 2 or less, which is like hitting on a 1 for a D6, but worse because there’s more sides. (I know statistics are the same but they still never seem to hit!) I was thinking about increasing carpet bombing to a 3 or less, to give them the real firepower they had. I know that they were really good at simply destroying cities, but the only concept that can show that is by destroying factories. What do you guys think? Would it be too strong, or do you think it would be okay?

I don’t think Germany should be able to “go through Russia”. Historically, it wasn’t the case. It is one of many of A&A legacies / fallacies. The Victory Points gives you a hint as to what territories are important to win the game. Germany wins nothing except a few IPPs by conquering Moscow. If the Russian player in your game has stacked Moscow & Stalingrad with slow units, he has lost the game.

Re Carpet bombing, I like the rules as they are (and so does everyone else in my group). Strategic bombers are meant for infrastructure. Historically, ‘carbet bombing’ armies were not effectively used in WW2.

If you contact the company directly and speak with Doug. I am more then positive something can be worked out if you need the number its  #918-208-9573 mind you this is central time in the U.S. so call accordingly

Address your concerns and see what can be done Best Wishs!

@Mapkov2004:

Thanks for the clarification.  It helps us put greatly.

I was referring to the transport ship for the 1940 Global 2nd Edition.

Regards.

OK, that is what I thought, because this particular forum is for the variant Global 1936 and 1939 game. The 2nd edition 1940 Global forum is more in the middle of the first page, but I think I answered your question, OK.

Good luck! :-)

John

Yes it does. Adjust your ICP chart after each turn.

YES.

Because they are at war with an Axis power (Germany).

Hi, Ben,

Yeah, Wikipedia plays a big part in my research.  But I stumble across other websites as I’m hunting for things also.  Sometimes I find declassified official documents from the time.  I also use other games in my collection, like War in Flames and Battlewagon, where the designers did the research, and came to their own conclusions about how to fudge things.  I used to be in Military Intelligence when I was active duty army.  I spent six years at NSA (“In God we trust.  All others we monitor”)  :wink:  So I developed the habit of confirming intelligence from multiple sources whenever possible.  I’m still in the National Guard, actually.  But I switched my MOS to MP so I didn’t have to drive so far for drills.

Midnight,

Good job on the research.  Every time I start to do it for land forces, I get distracted by all the different sources, and how they use different methods for listing things.  Yeah, with the way A&A works, where the infantry of one country is equal to the infantry of every other country (unless you are using the elite units in Global ’39), then you have to reflect differences in troop and equipment quality by using different ratios to represent one unit.

One idea I’ve toyed with is using the same ratio for everyone’s infantry, (like 1 for every three divisions) but then reflecting the differences in firepower by assigning different ratios for artillery.  For instance, at the start maybe Germany gets an artillery unit for every 2 infantry, and France gets one for every 5 infantry, or something along those lines.  The problem there, of course, is that the French (and Russians) really really liked artillery, and it made up a bigger percentage of their overall forces.  So it would not be entirely satisfying from a historical perspective.  For the same reasons, I am reluctant to just start them off with a bunch of SS units.  Although I suppose I could just not call them SS units.  But I’d know.  I’D KNOW, and it would bug me  :-D

Revisions in progress that will have some slightly different setup for neutrals. Not a game changer, just better. The Rules will be better written also.