6.1 RULE CLARIFICATIONS DATABASE

@Imperious:

This does not belong here. Spend 3 more seconds of time and notice global has its own section.

You forgot: “and welcome to the forum!”.

Where are the updated rules with the 20 “minor fixes”? They were supposed to be out months ago? It’s impossible to read through the threads. Let me guess “soon”?

I could see doing that on a larger map, but I’m concerned that the current map is too small for that. Then again, the game includes air bases, so maybe naval bases/ports aren’t exactly out of the question. Either way, I like the specifics of your suggestion.

To the designers - how many games of 7.1 have you played?

Out of 6 games we have played Axis won once but that was mainly due to good rolls in first turn.

Axis have never taken all of Russia’s cities. In 5 games they never held a single Russian cities for more than 1 round. I wouldn’t even say Russia is too strong. The Baltic States/Poland issue definitely buys Russia an extra round (even though it only addresses the center).

It’s the 1st turn that is the issue now it seems. Germany and especially Italy can’t seem to get enough of the UK navy, planes, and infantry out of the way. I think 6.1 was 60/40 Axis favor but I’m thinking now it’s 80/20 Allies favor.

It seems there could be possible rule misinterpretations from various people on the board. What is the percentage breakdown for the designers win/loss in 7.1?

Hi have you got the setups for download cause I would really like to try this on map I’ve been working on
I took modern world map enlarge European contents(spelled wrong I know) then then broke every country into their administration division that I could.

Thanks for the feedback man, it’s much appreciated!  I’ll be discussing this with the guys I play with.  Alot of the things you pointed out make sense, so I’ll definitely be rethinking them.

There’s a few points I disagree with though.

I figured the port in Santa Cruz for the Allies would actually be quite useless to them, in exception to the Commonwealth fleet fleeing the pacific, but that’s about it.  It’s faster to go through the Panama canal the vast majority of the time anyway.

Splitting sea zone 28 in half was done to make it realistic, because it’s just not practical in real terms.  I guess it just depends how you wanna balance gameplay and realism…  I’m pretty excited for that '36 map, we’ll see what they do with it :).

As for building in friendly territory, I can see your point with the Soviets.  I don’t see a problem however with places like Iran and Free French territories, vice versa for the Axis with their eligible territories.  Compromises can be made.  I’m aware that Germany can do this already with the minors.  At least it’s not like G40 where you can build anywhere (where there’s enough value in the territory).

I think the logistical issues with the way China produces is pretty much related to how the population itself fought with the military against the Japanese.  The population is scattered, yes, but why would a militia form up in force in western China when there’s no direct threat there, and then march their way over after?  Better to form up where you’re needed most, isn’t it, especially with the kind of transportation they had at the time?  The fight is in Eastern China, and that’s where the majority of the population is anyway, so more people can volunteer to fight close to the front lines, where it’s relevant.  Just send the supplies to where they’re needed.  Also in regards to C. China, the Russians are just too busy in my games to go there.  The C. Chinese collect little in the first place, so I figured it wouldn’t make that big of a deal.  F.E.C. doesn’t factor much into this for me, because they’re usually toppled within three turns when I play with my regulars.  I know it’s tough for the F.E.C., ANZAC and Americans later on otherwise in other peoples’ games though.  It just depends on what Japan does.  Giving them a major factory actually seems to balance out everything with the changes in that theatre I proposed.

I downgraded the factories in Karelia and Fukuoka and raised the value of Helsinki because the factories there in the official setup stand in contradiction to the rules.  For actual game mechanics in terms of how units work and what they’re allowed to do, I don’t agree with this sort of thing.  Raising/swapping the values in the territories can be done too, it doesn’t matter much, just as long as nothing contradicts the rules in that fashion.

Thank you…

This is great news. Looking forward to it. We’ll try them out next game.