Global War, 2nd edition - due 1\. November 2015

I based off what they pretty much had at peak of war. I didn’t do the 1 piece equals so many. I just made it like Uk 6 BB and spread them out. US I had 7 BB but reduced it to 5. 4 damaged in Hawaii at start of game. If it had like real 4 light cruisers and 2 h cruisers I just made that 2 normal cruisers and 2 more normal cruisers. To eliminate the 3 diff pieces. Everything else straight up with tweaks to setup as we played the game.
Yes the eastern front setup is more like spring of 41 than dec. 41 like pac is. based on the game balance and timing to work
Out. As u see the battle of the Atlantic is at its peak too. More like dec 41 there. Only issue in most games if not all is the d day invasions. Most happen before June of 44 in all games but to get correct US wouldn’t attack Europe until turn 7 or 8 with torch happening sooner
That would be a major setup change and year of turns.
I have my own map for game too.

@GeneralHandGrenade Thank you very much!

@Royal:

See now this is interesting, because I’m playing Germany, and I don’t have nearly enough troops to get through Russia. It’s 1942, and I’m basically trying to hold onto the, what I call, “Leningrad line.” I built a lot of infantry, which in the end caused tons of problems because They simply can’t get to the front line fast enough. Don’t get me wrong, I make about 80 IPP’s, but I don’t have the mechanized power to keep the Russians at bay. What they have done is basically let me have everything, and stacked artillery and Militia in Moscow and Stalingrad, making them unreasonable to even try to attack. I don’t know what to do! America is just about to enter the war and throw roughly 10 transports at my door. Italy is doing well owning all of Africa, but Japan never did well and China and is basically 3 years behind the ballpark. I could start buying strategic bombers, but it seems like carpet bombing is a waste, even with heavy bombers.

That brings me to a question that I would like to have input on for everyone who is reading this Forum (Thanks by the way, I really needed some feedback like this!) Carpet bombing only hits on a 2 or less, which is like hitting on a 1 for a D6, but worse because there’s more sides. (I know statistics are the same but they still never seem to hit!) I was thinking about increasing carpet bombing to a 3 or less, to give them the real firepower they had. I know that they were really good at simply destroying cities, but the only concept that can show that is by destroying factories. What do you guys think? Would it be too strong, or do you think it would be okay?

I don’t think Germany should be able to “go through Russia”. Historically, it wasn’t the case. It is one of many of A&A legacies / fallacies. The Victory Points gives you a hint as to what territories are important to win the game. Germany wins nothing except a few IPPs by conquering Moscow. If the Russian player in your game has stacked Moscow & Stalingrad with slow units, he has lost the game.

Re Carpet bombing, I like the rules as they are (and so does everyone else in my group). Strategic bombers are meant for infrastructure. Historically, ‘carbet bombing’ armies were not effectively used in WW2.

@Rank:

Jinx

As for the highlight every time we get a new guy the charts are so busy this may help simplify the starting learning curve. If you can get a new to game tester for your charts it may assist on readability. I know that the standard charts were a bit of info overload. Suggestion to have starter units better separated from upgrades and researched units. Takes a bit of explaining that every time we get a new guy in. Example germany jumps strait into super heavy tanks skips the 6 regular heavies required first. And all new guys think they can build heavy tanks off the hop without research due to chart placing. A simple coloured highlight signifying reasearch required would eliminate this. Or maybe 3 charts first basic units, second tech and upgrades, final all units together. And get them more into the game faster rather than getting corrected constantly, increases the fun factor for the new guys.

Ah, that explains a few of your chart lines. Didn’t realize you had developed your own air combat rules. They sound interesting. Maybe a bit much for our group now though, lots of newer players. Still not fully grasping current rules without the odd reading.

What program are you using? this has me interested in tidying up our charts.

As for the switch from historical its not often I agree but a real Stalin in this position would. In current game as soviets I own South America and Middle East. And am neutral across the board nonagression pacts with axis.  Im ready to attack germany, italy,usa at panama canal,  india (fec), africa (uk), and japan at Tokyo, all at once. Germany has london, and japan focused on only us and owns San Francisco. But im not allowed to unless us attacks me first or berlin falls. All combatants are severely unit depleted due to fighting while im ready to go. Russia has largest navy on both oceans lol. In no way would Stalin really hesitate, Russia is a global power able to expand all over the globe.  But the rules have the Russians handcuffed. So im now forced to take berlin first and allow the rest to rebuild before i can take it all. Meaning allies must win first, so I can never actually attack allies until the game has already ended realistically.

John Brown

Welcome and thank you also. Ill look into those sets. Was more thinking if 1939 setup comes out. Chart changes adding their newer units would also be a help,  if all in one chart. Rather than add-on expansion charts or I’ll need a massive amount of paper on the walls. Don’t want it to become a legal style rules with endless exceptions and loopholes lol. Or nobody will want to play it.

Hehe, sometime our games turn out to be a lot like that. But we have a core of experienced players and a kind of forgiving system for mistakes in purchases and those that neglected to read the rules.
I’ve played full games of G36 over twenty times now, and I still keep the manual by my elbow and a bunch of online FAQ pages printed out. I’m generally the referee for our game and there is so much to remember and so much grey area that we find we often need to patch it up with house rules.

We have tried it out in past games. For instance, we allowed the Soviets to DOW against the Allies. The Soviets built a massive fleet presence. Though they did DOW against the Allies, the Soviets natural enemy is the Axis.
The fact that the Soviets could now DOW against Allies did not change the game in the slightest. The Soviets VP points are mostly gained from taking neutral nations which they gathered from the middle east. But they had no reason to come into conflict with any western powers except for India (which was taken by Japan) and Egypt, which was far off and did not matter. The Soviets played a great game of pacifism and won the game. Sure at one point they declared war against the Allies, but only because it made the Axis hope that they would come to blows and eased pressure from the German/Soviet border. Only one French Militia was lost in Syria to the Soviets.

My conclusion is that there is no reason for that rule, except for historical railroading (not meant in a derogatory way).
Theoretically the Soviets could build a large fleet (which they did) and marines (which they did) and invade…England (which they did: northern Ireland) or America. But they don’t need too, all the IPP they need can be found on the continent, and in our game, after the soviet fleet invaded Ireland. They trundled back home to the Baltic. It was a pretense to gain them time on the German/Soviet border to strengthen and achieve parity on the border. Earlier, Germany could have taken them, especially with their expenses into a large fleet. But by the time the Axis saw that the Soviets in England in any meaningful way was a pipe dream; it was too late.

No need for a Soviet limiting of DOW, at least in my opinion.

So in our current game. The French (according to designer rules of French DOW to Neutral nations) DOW against Republican Spain while they where in Civil War. They actually went so far as to lose Bordeaux and Marseilles to Republican Spain in Early 1938.
We thought about the rules a little, and said that for this game, we would let the Soviets be capable of DOW against allies, and begin their rearmament rolls because of being at war with a “Major” power. France will be collecting its Wartime Income.

It worked to some degree in Axis favor in the short term, because the French and Soviet fleets mutually decimated themselves, and the Spanish/French forces have cleared western Europe of troops. Perhaps the Soviets will continue to sink Lend Lease to Spain. Perhaps, and if nothing else, France has lost half of its land army because of its need to watch Germany.

In the long term it will bite Axis in the butt. But…perhaps a Chamberlain-Ribbentrop pact can be signed. Perhaps.

Anyways, its exciting. :-)

@Munck:

HBG just responded to my question about the 1939 setup on Facebook.

They are done. We are reviewing them do look for them in a couple weeks.

Good news�  :mrgreen:

Awesome news, Munck! :-D

I still find Europe overly crowded, which is so annoying.

Yes it does. Adjust your ICP chart after each turn.

Just a thought. You could roll a die for automatic retreats. What I mean is if defender wants to retreat, then roll a die and that many can retreat. Bad die roll and he may have to leave a good piece behind. Also could force the attacker the same thing.