Preview Copies of 1940 Second Edition Arrived

@Olmate
Welcome to the forum.

The rulebook should be clarification enough (1940 Pac.2nd ed., page 15):
“A quick reaction team of no more than 3 defending fighters and/or tactical bombers (strategic bombers can’t scramble) located on each island or coastal territory that has an operative air base can be scrambled to defend against attacks in the sea zones adjacent to those territories.”

As you correctly stated this wording clearly doesn’t include fighters located on carriers in seazones.

Why should something not being part of the rules be explicitly stated in the rulebook? Or in any FAQ/Errata when the wording of the rule is clear enough? There are hundreds of House Rules that might fill what people are missing being included in game rules / rulebooks.

There of course exist player created variants of Global1940 that have scrambling from carriers included.

I find the AI does a much better job on the latest 1942 game. At least as Axis.

I prefer the pressure to be on the axis to make things happen. Right now it is a little too easy for the axis to catch up in income.

@variance:

@builder_chris2:

maybe i just need to face up to the fact that the reason the games i play in seem to be so diffeernt is me and the dudes i game with msut suck no matter who plays the axis, cuzz most of our face to face games result in an allied win and we play with no bid.

The axis only have the advantage for the first half dozen rounds or so.  After that America kicks into high gear, so the longer your games go on (like 10-15 rounds or more), the greater the allied advantage will become. Â

True only if the Axis don’t close or pass the Allies on the Economic gap by that time or maybe 1 or 2 rounds after.

All the rule changes were done to benefit the allies. If you are playing OOB the allies are garbage.
~

taking calcutta is much easier. How is it even possible to defend India?

Even if you are not calcutta oriented and you are just a crazy guy who does whatever, on round 1 you can take anzac if you win a 1 infantry vs 1 infantry battle.

even if you are none of the above drop minors round 2 or 3 and wam bam shazam you have the ground forces necessary to secure all of asia.

J3 anzac is 100% as well. TO do this you have to DoW J1 take west australia. Then J2 fly 13 air units on it. Then J3 bam anzac dead, thanks for playing. (you can get the rest of your air if you feel like dropping an airbase on kwangsi instead of doing the caroline thing).

~

As far as Europe goes. Look at how empty london is. So you defend london. Say bye to Egypt, just give Italy a few rounds.

~

Round 1 hit sz 110, sz 111, sz 112. 1 sub vs 1 destroyer in sz 109. buy dd sub carrier.

You sink a bunch of naval and place sz 112. He can only hit with 6 units, 3 fighter tactical carrier and dd vs sub dd cruiser bship carrier 2 fighter. You are 1 up. Can UK defend itself? Not with Naval.

So he buys 9 infantry.  Flies his stuff in gets the canada dudes in and yet Germany still has 50-61% to defend UK. OK ignore it and go for Russia. Simple.

So what stops Italy from taking Egypt? Unless you pull India air to somaliland and then fly it to Egypt (or pull it to transjordan) you don’t stand a chance. Even if you do, you got like a 1/3 chance of holding.
~

Sure USA makes 30 when at war (25 in 2nd edition), but the only other allied power making NO money is ANZAC.

**Point is OOB can get super stupid super fast or end up being super boring super stalemate. Generally speaking yeah I J1 DOW and yeah I J3 ANZAC or I wait and take calcutta. I prefer ANZAC, easy to defend and it is easier to work to India than to push out later. At first global was super boring and I generally played three rounds (sea lion / calcutta and was done) then when I developed other strategies it was fun for the first couple games, but then I realized OOB pacific was just stupid.

OOB had few strategies and you were almost always better off just going gun ho for the quick win.**

I will also add that if you do not do some sort of all in play as the axis you will lose the game in the long run.

Meh…I think that goes both ways.  As to whether the bomber would be too strong, I think it might be good for the game now.  On the other side, if I had a bomber, I would immediately buy another one.  Lots of creative things to do with that bomber…I think it could prove to be pretty strong…but that’s just my opinion.

The other thread hasn’t been sticky’d yet.  Here it is.

Alpha + 3 Charts

@Pelanderfunk:

I like the early attacks against the US, but it looks like Russia was becoming a problem.

The attacks against America were half baked - I was still at the drawing board but jumped in anyway.

A bigger problem than Russia is UK in Africa, the Mediterranean, and South East Europe.  If Italy were an asset to Europe and not a liability, I think I could deal with the Russians.  In fact, if I could lock UK out of the Med (without extra effort from Japan or Germany) I would combine the Japanese North American campaign with Sea Lion and be sitting pretty.

What to do about that pesky Med…