Mongolia and Neutrals - rules summarized here

I would not be G40 boxed set for a new rulebook or even for new French unit sculpts. However, I would buy a G40 boxed set for some combination of two or more of these changes:

1. Long standing balance issues were resolved officially instead of with the house rule hodgepodge we use now.
2. Historical inaccurances (Scapa Flow, Iceland, Sierra Leone, etc) were corrected on the map/setup (for instance, Iceland was occupied by the US on July 7th 1941, but the map shows it as a UK territory from the start).
3. There were cool new sculpts for multiple powers, and cleaned up sculpts for units that look too similar (ANZAC cruiser vs destroyer for instance, or corrected the 9 ft tall ANZAC infantry unit).
4. New map! For instance, eastern Russia is vast and would have been a Japanese sinkhole that brought no benefit, but in the G40 map those territories all actually produce income. The Global War map is a much better representation – combined German/Japan strategies that work on the current map would not work on Global War map.
5. Map supports faster setup – MICs and setup bases pre-printed, for instance.
6. Rule changes that allow the US to build bases on other Allies territories.
7. Rule changes to fix unit issues (cruisers!)
8. Separate control markers for UK Pacific vs UK Atlantic

Basically, a couple of big changes or a bunch of small changes make the investment worthwhile IMO.

Fixing NOs could be part of #1 – giving the UK an additional NO of no German navy in the Atlantic other than sea zone 112 would probably help the balance issue. Also, giving Japan an NO that costs it money if it DOESN’T control those islands once at war with the US might help the balance issue.

Marsh

Simon, Marc, Krieghund Thank you for input and clarification. This will avoid any confusion or debate later.
Sean…

No, it wasn’t on my list.  I just added it as 16e

It is in the Triple A list in the program, though.  If you look down the description of the G40 map, one of the things is “rules Triple A engine doesn’t recognize” or something like that.  That’s the list I meant it was already on

Its a pretty straight forward setup:

Attacker declares ALL combat moves and then you request defender to decide on Scrambles/Intercepts.  This indicates you have concluded all your combat moves for the turn.

At this point, the Attacker has passed the point of no return and is stuck with all the decisions just made.

You’ll get a lot of mileage out of requiring the attacker to request scramble decisions with the understanding it indicates they have concluded all their combat moves.

In the case where there are no scrambles, just require the attacker to announce something along the lines of, “That ends my combat move phase.”

Generally it is VERY important when playing in person to make sure you announce the transition of the phases and don’t muddle up combat and non-combat moves.  Not saying people all cheat, but it sucks when you lose track of unit movement and end up double moving something that impacts the game dramatically (like moving a bomber to Hawaii in your combat move phase and then non-combat moving it in the same round to one of the smaller islands and now being in striking distance of unprotected Japanese TT which should have been safe but now are not).

what about from an allied POV though?

Allied POV might work if Germany is on the defencive (not very common), but Japan has outgrown US economy but not taken India. (happends alot, especialy with kgf or balance)

Allies need to keep Germany from activating Sweden (might be the easiest to isolate), Spain (easiest to attack) and Turkey (big UK army from 2IC in Egypt and Persia?). Goes without saying that allies attack land in africa and south america to boost their economy.

Im not saying its usualy a good idea, but it might be a plausible strategy to get that little extra IPC that stops Japan from winning pacific side. (Japan gains nothing if allied DOW neutrals, unless they pick up Afgahnistan.)

Now Cow sure is comming to trollpost me, no dubt :P
Trow in your best comment.

For clarity -

A Blitz is defined as a combat movement where a tank or mech/tank pairing enters an unoccupied enemy territory, captures it, and moves to a second territory as a single combat move.

Any other movement of two spaces, whether during combat or noncombat, is NOT a Blitz and should not be called a Blitz.  It’s either a combat move or a noncombat move, but not a Blitz.

This is important because Mech Inf can always move two spaces as a combat or noncombat move, provided it’s not a Blitz. Calling such moves “Blitzes” implies that Mech can only move two spaces with a tank under every circumstance, and that is NOT the case.

Before you know it, every territory will have a Airbase / Minor / Navalbase,  There will be more political rules than ever, and victory conditions will be reduced to “play until someone else gives up.”
I couldnt agree with you more.