Grasshopper's G40 Card Deck (video added)

@surfer

Yeah, you’re right.

@Grandmaster-Bert
nice like the artwork :) Seems as if the unit names are a tad too dark but it all looks good

@aequitas-et-veritas said in New to G40...will not playing w/NOs break the game?:

@taamvan said in New to G40...will not playing w/NOs break the game?:

we are omitting that shutting off US NOs means they are at minimum income all game. A different game for sure…but probably not an Allied advantage

I agree on that.
The US needs any IPC they can get!
I played a few games with minimum income for the Allies. You will unlikely win. The Allies depend on the NO’s, so does the Axis powers.
You may experiment with diffrent NO’s or change them, but shutting them off is not a good idea Imo.

We play with NOs off except USA +30 when at war. It works great for us. Give it a try.

@Aaron_the_Warmonger:

@simon33:

Dutch are allies. You don’t need to convert these territories to uk or Anzac control to land fighters on them. The fighters can be landed the same turn as the troops.

Are you sure?  looking at the rules i see under Dutch Territories in the pacific rulebook that They are treated as friendly to allies except for UK/ANZAC guardianship.  under friendly neutrals it says you may not attack a friendly neutral or fly air units over it, but may move land units onto it in noncombat.

I assume friendly meant friendly neutral.  So we assumed that until the dutch territory has been controlled since the start of your turn by an ally, you can’t land on it.  I would love some clarification on this if anyone has it (preferably with a rule’s citation!)  thanks everyone!

I’m sure. Dutch aren’t friendly neutral. Although the rulebook doesn’t make this as clear as I would like. Most convincing bit is here:
@Pac:

These two powers also have an arrangement with the
Dutch government in exile (Holland having been captured
by Germany) and have taken guardianship of the Dutch
territories in the Pacific.

The combined arms rule (actually called “Commander In Chief”) was in the first edition of Classic but was removed from the second edition of Classic.  Apparently they thought back then that this rule was to easily taken advantage of by Allied players.

The way it worked was:
The US moves “X” units to United Kingdom.  The UK already has a number of units already there.  The US moves a number of transports that can carry all the current US and UK units on United Kingdom to the sea zone adjacent to the territory.
During the Collect Income phase of the US turn, the US and UK players agree to make the US Commander In Chief.  The US player takes a stack of 3 US control markers and places them in United Kingdom.
Then on the UK player’s turn, the UK player does not move any of the units intended for the combined force.  If the UK moves any of it’s units stationed on United Kingdom, they CAN NOT be included in the combined force.
Then on the US player’s next turn, the US player is now free to move any or all units stationed on United Kingdom as long as they DID NOT move during the UK player’s turn.
By the way, this includes UK aircraft if they didn’t move on the UK’s turn.

So, basically, any country’s units that are going to be included in the combined force but are not from the country of the Commander In Chief have to be in the launching territory before the Commanding player is chosen.  It might be a little more complex, but I think this rule could be applied to Global 1940.
For example:  Say England wants to attack a Japanese force in Burma from India.  They want to use a combined force of UK, US, Soviet and ANZAC units.  So on UK Pacific’s turn, UK can move units into India.  On the UK’s Collect Income phase, they get chosen as Commander In Chief.  The Soviet, US and ANZAC forces have to be already in India at this time and those are the ONLY non UK forces that the UK can move next turn.  Even if one of the other countries move more units into India, those new units could NOT be used in the UK’s next turn.
Assuming the UK attacks Burma with the combined force and defeats the Japanese, UK India will get possession of that territory.  Also, I believe the last casualty HAS to belong to the Commander In Chief’s country (in this case, UK).

@Marshmallow:

@Baron:

A scrambled plane cannot hit sub without a DD.

This.

Marsh

Yeah my mistake. I was thinking the plane could hit the sub, but it can’t w/o a def destroyer.

I don’t see a flight path on the map that would be shortened by being able to fly over the Pripet Marshes, so I suppose that it’s not particularly relevant from an A&A perspective whether or not planes can fly over them.

G5 is possible, but not with a G1 attack.

Japan can occupie russian terretories behind china in G4 and take 4 IPCs from the far east, without leaving too much planes in Japan/Mandschuria.

Sea Lion is not an option. Russia grows too big.

You are right! A combined attack on Russia is my favourite solution, too.

G5 or G6 for capturing Moskau is realistic.

We call this tactic “Panzerwalze”. :-D