Capital Question

:-D :-D :-D :-D

I believe it for the gamesmanship.  It makes Greece a little more of a fight.  One legitamate territory is now split into three destinct territories.  Exagerating the canal into a full blown body of water makes the British or Italians produce or keep transports just to get to Corinth instead of just walking in.  Hightens the challenge.  The map is not exactly geographically accurate in a couple of places but it adds to the playability of the game.  Look at North Africa.  In Global 39 the Sahara desert is reduced in comparison to Europe 1940 in order to add more French territories to fight over.

Ya we know.

Thanks, I just thought it seemed a bit low.

Historically, the meaning of the term “capital ship” has evolved over time.  Broadly speaking it refers to the most powerful category of warship in a navy, and in its original usage (dating back to WWI and/or the 1920s) it was a term that encompased both categories of dreadnought-type vessels: battleships and battlecruisers.  This was at a time when it was still believed that naval battles would ultimately be decided by slugging matches between fleets of heavily-armoured warships armed with heavy artillery.  Battlecruisers went out of fashion after WWI, with just a few more being completed from the 1920s onward.  Battleships improved in speed, and by the 1930s and 1940s they had (in a sense) merged with battlecruisers to produce “fast battleships” which combined the speed of battlecruisers with the firepower and protection of battleships.  During WWII, the aircraft carrier displaced battleships as the most important pieces on the naval chessboard, and they became regarded as the new “capital ships” of navies.  Carriers were themselves (arguably) displaced in the capital-ship role by ballistic missile submarines when they arrived on the scene in the 1950s and 1960s – but the point is arguable because CVNs and SSBNs have very different missions and capabilities, and because the largest CVNs (like the Nimitz class carriers) are huge and enormously expensive vessels, even when compared with big SSBNs.

Uncrustable mentioned that in Global War battleships and carriers are both considered capital ships, and Cmdr Jennifer indicated this also being the case in A&A.  This certainly works from a historical perspective, since the former were considered capital ships at the beginning of the war and the latter at its end.

Hey Tigerman, I just played my first game yesterday.  I really enjoyed it and I want to say thank you for developing a great game.  It is an awesome advanced-level axis & allies that should keep even the best players challenged for years to come.

I was playing as USSR and our side won!  I Just wanted to give you a few first impressions as newbie player feedback for your interest:

I really like some of the mechanics of the game that give you more options (e.g. mechs towing artillery; paratroopers, fortresses)

There are a couple of oddities about the map that I don’t like (e.g. Australia and Cairo are far more vulnerable than in the Global 1940 map; only 1 move from USA to Normandy).  Seem to me not enough sea zones in a few areas.

Axis have a lot of advantages (e.g. blitzkrieg, sneak attack, banzai, all kinds of special units) and the allies don’t seem to have much going for them.  It feels very weighted toward the axis side.

Not all of the powers are equal difficulty to handle.  Each has strengths and weaknesses, but overall I would say the guy who plays UK has a much more difficult job than others do.  Just managing all those economies looks very hard.

Germany gets $5 tanks so they can build just tanks and slaughter Russia early. Meanwhile if Russia rolls poorly for income the first few rounds they might not have much to fight back with. Maybe Russia getting $2 infantry could balance that, or more expensive German tanks.  In Global 1940 Germany has to use all 5 kinds of ground units effectively (inf, art, mech, tank, AA) and coordinate air support for combined arms.  In Global War 1939 if Germany can kill Russia just building tanks (less efficient than mech/art combos), then that tells you Russia is too weak.  Another bump might be to give Russia fortresses in Moscow and Stalingrad as well as Leningrad.

South Africa as a separate economy means it is a very small economy.  It can’t do much to help defend or liberate Cairo.  It should be part of the UK economy or at least UK should be able to mobilize more units there (mobile ones).

USSR needs a minor IC either in Stalingrad or Baku and they can’t afford to build one.  If they one in that area they might be able to send some mobile units down to Cairo.

Again, thanks for all your hard work on this game.

Thanks guys for answering all the questions for Wild Bill. From what I read you guys are correct on all fronts! I’ve not been able to get on the forum as much as I use too but hopefully that will change. I am glad you guys love the game!

@Variable:

@Skippi:

Some questions:

1. SBR. Did the strategic bombers attack with d12 or d6? We think we added +2 like in the alpha+3.9 rules of global?!
Strats are 2D6, Tacs are 1D6.
2. Strait of Danemark: Can you pass it, while Danemark is still neutral? Or must you capture it with the Germans, to pass it in the next turn?
The rules do not restrict movement there. I will say you can pass it, but will check with Tigerman to be sure.
3. The tech development from a great nation works only for them or also for the minor states? Example: German tech dont work for Romania, Ungary etc.?! British tech works for Canada, South Africa and FEC? Can the minors spend IPC for the tech development?
Only Major Powers are allowed to research and benefit from technology.
4. Whats the ideas of the two poland rules? The first one (poland is still poland) is much different than the other, where poland units change to british. Because now the income gets to London and british units may can attack!
The preferred way to play is with Poland having it’s own units and income. Think of the other as an optional rule to simplify the game if needed or wanted.
5. Can the communist chinese attack japanese Units and territories? And can they (Communist and Nationalist China) attack the yellow japanese territories in Asia mainland?
Communist Chinese may attack Japanese with the Russians if Russia is at war with Japan. All Chinese may liberate or capture any Japanese held territory themselves since they start at war with Japan. They may not move units into any territory originally owned by Far East Command except for Hong Kong, but may move units into French Indochina or Saigon. Chinese can not attack each other, but the Communists can capture empty territories from the Nationalists.
6. Whats the rules for AA Guns? One dice for every plane or only a maximum of 3 dice per every AA Gun (Alpha+3.9)?
1D12 per aircraft.
7. Whats the definition of “Great Britain”? The lands: London, Liverpool and Scotland?
Yes, and Belfast. The British Isles.
8. Did you revised the map? On my map there are in cairo and Oslo Navalbases. But in your last version (4.1) there arent some in the setup in this states.
Good catch. I will defer to Tigerman on this. Not sure if he intended to delete those bases. I think they are supposed to be there and the setup chart was just for reference. There are no bases included on the new revised map.
9. Can the chinese fighter (american flying tigers) attack the japanese, also the burma road is captured?
Yes, as long as the US is at war with Japan. Burma road has no effect on this.
10. Did the tech works in addition to the specifics of the nations? Example: The US transports and Destroyer cost at war -1 IPC. If the US developed improved shipyards, does Trn and DD cost now -2 IPC, while US is at war?
That’s correct. Remember, tech is an option and may lead to balance issues. But it is fun and interesting!

We find our game was a little bit unbalanced, because the Axis gets 9 VC in their third turn. They capture 10 in the fourth turn and will capture the last two in their next turns. The Axis win the war trough surrender of the allies. We like the map, the units specifics and special the tech chart. We painted about 150 units by ourself and it looks great.

Thanks Variable for answering these questions.

Yes: the Straits of Denmark are passable by all nations as long as Denmark is neutral.