Global 2nd edition Q+A ( AAG40.2)

@Krieghund Thank you!

@Kreuzfeld said in Why is Global better than Revised?:

@SS-GEN It is a very good game. At least 40% of the rules are relating to optional units. Most people play with most optional units, but a lot of people play the vanilla version.

:+1: :+1: :+1:

@PainState:

@StuckTojo:

@Gargantua:

I have seen some guys doing all sub bids. If you can get the bid to 30 -� � 5 subs with all major fleets can do alot of damage, and can really assist UK / hamper axis early; And make G1 painful to plan.

1 off canada,
2 off UK with fleets,
1 off gibraltar,
1 with med fleet

Sounds like a sub-standard strategy to me….� � :-P

I’ll be here all week, folks.

LOL

You are very witty good sir.

:-D

PS: is there a cover charge at your next gig?

Nope.  Just keep feeding me whisky.  :-D

Our group has played with India and UK as seperate parts of the Commonwealth (Global 39 has the FEC {Far East Command} and the uk seperate}).  The allies have to work together and nt compete against each other.  The ANZAC player already has to share the DEI with India if either of them are going to have any real income to work with.  India and UK can work together as seperate players.

AS for the thread, build destroyers in Canada to hunt subs to work on your NO (no German Uboats in the Atlantic).  Also, bomg Germany in West Germany, Paris, Normandy…where ever you can hit them.  You may not be able to ivade effectively by yourself but you can harrass the German player enough that he has to pay attention to the Uk as well as smash the Soviets.  Landings in Norway and fortifying it takes away from Germany and opens another route to aid the Soviets.  Securing the Northern flank can help Leningrad or if need be retake it for the Soviets.  Zhukov44 was right.  Don’t lose Cairo.  Trops build in South Africa of tanks and mechs can help hold Cairo and even destroy the North African Italian army.  A IC build in Cairo, once secured will help limmit Italy and secure a route for US troops the attack the soft underside of Europe (usually not that well defended by the axis).  One last thing is hold Gibraltor if possible.  Building and air base there and sending some fighters can make US entry into the med so much easier.  It also  allows allied ships into the med to keep the Italians from their Med naval NO if the British med navy didn’t fare so well.

If Germany wants to make a naval build round 1, usually it will be 1 carrier + 2 transports OR 1 carrier, 1 destroyer and 1 submarine. Either way the total equals 30 IPCs.
The reason for this purchase is it gives Germany a lot of options on future moves.
A - The most obvious is a preparation for Sealion. You will need the loaded carrier plus other warships to protect the stack of transports you put there on round 2. Also, whatever ships Germany has will be used to clear the way for the German landings plus protect the transports if England scrambles, leaving more of your Luftwaffe to join in the London attack.
B - Secondly, you can use them to threaten Sealion even if you don’t plan to actually invade England. This keeps the UK on edge buying defensively which could give Italy some badly needed breathing room in the Med. If Germany can keep UK from putting more units in the Med for even just a couple of rounds, it could be just enough for Italy to get the upper hand.
C - A loaded carrier plus other warships will threaten any Allied fleet and cause the US in particular to invest in more warships to protect it’s transports if they want to stage by Gibraltar and think of approaching Europe.
D - You could use the German navy for an amphibious invasion of Leningrad when you decide to attack Russia. If you can take Leningrad in the same round that you first attack Russia, then you can replace the “Peace With Russia NO” with the “German Occupation of Leningrad NO” and not loose $5 when you attack Russia.
E - Another idea might be to send them into the Med to boost the Italian navy and help them get over the Allies there.

I’m sure there are other good uses that I just can’t think of right now. I guess since Germany buying a navy round 1 does at least threaten Sealion which may prevent England from running the Taranto raid, although I have seen them do it anyway even if Germany threatens Sealion. The point is, if the UK player you are playing with is bound and determined to wipe out the Italian navy, I don’t think your German G1 purchase will matter one way or the other.
That being said, while the naval purchase is most popular for Germany, they are not bound by it. There are many options. 2 bombers + 1 submarine OR 2 bombers + 1 tank are a couple of options. Another possibility is a Major IC to place in Romania in preparation for a major attack on Russia round 2 or 3.

As for the Taranto attack, the UK usually sends the following units:
1 carrier, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 1 tac bomber from SZ 98 to SZ 97.
2 fighters, 1 bomber from London to SZ 97.
1 fighter from Malta to SZ 96.
1 fighter from Gibraltar to SZ 96.
The 2 fighters in SZ 96 to kill the Italian destroyer and transport. They will land on Malta.
The tac bomber from SZ 98 and strat bomber from London (assuming they survive) will land on Malta.
The 2 fighters from London will land on the carrier assuming they all survive.

The Taranto raid is pretty devastating to Italy but not necessarily game ending. Italy could recover and give UK a pretty good fight. At the very least, Italy is good for keeping the UK mostly occupied while Germany goes all out after Russia.

As for the 18 Russians in the east, there are a number of things you can do with them.
A - Move all 18 to Amur to temp Japan. In this case, they will probably get wiped out as Japan will probably take the bait. It will suck for Russia to lose all those guys and there will be nothing left to stop Japan from taking all those cheap territories. On the plus side, with Japan attacking, it will put Mongolia on Russia’s side and get them 6 more infantry. Also, Japan will be expending a lot of resources in this attack, which could slow it’s progress down south where the real money is for them.
B - Immediately start moving all those guys toward Moscow. With any luck, they will reach Moscow in time to protect the capital from the massive German assault. It does leave all the cheap territories in the east empty for Japan to take without a fight. However, Russia won’t lose more than 6 or 7 IPCs and the Mongolians will still join you.
C - Place some on Amur as a guard against Japanese aggression while holding some back for either a counter attack or to head back to Moscow. There can be any combination involved in this plan.
D - You can go aggressive. Fly your Moscow planes out to join them so those infantry will have a little offensive punch. If Japan withdraws troops from Manchuria and/or Korea and leave one or both weak enough, especially if Japan is very busy taking on India, Australia or maybe the US Navy, Russia could use their Siberian troops to take Korea and Manchuria. Depending on the situation, that could really weaken Japan financially. One thing though, if Russia is the one that first attacks Japan, the Mongolians will remain strict neutrals and will never join with the Soviets (unless an Axis power were to attack them directly).

So why dont’t we got the Russian Bomber ? I sure could use it, would have given Russia more options. I dont care about the UK inf in Egypt, but no Russian Bomber makes me sad. Now I have to buy it turn 1, what a waste man

OK I cast my second vote for R&D.

One more vote is needed for Alpha3 AA to beat “none of the above”.  COME ON AA GUNS!!

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.