[1936] New player quick index project.

Yes, seems like everything is put together a bit haphazard/piecemeal from the documentation to the purchase of pieces.  The website could use some revamping and organizing as well.  It takes General Hand grenade posting videos on how to even build an army.  I actually have been holding off on 1936 due to all this.

We played OOB for a while. After we got “good” at it, i.e. good game flow, we started to add a few Expansions here and there where we felt we missed something. We only add a few new things at a time, taking it slow. The group has to adapt to the new rules/possibilities/units in the Expansions. That being said, there are many Expansions we would never use, because we feel they add nothing to the game - from a “Grand Strategic” point of view.

We think many of the Expansions go into a unnecessary level of detail. For example: SS Divisions, Minorities at War, almost all 3D printed units. Some people might like the extra detail, but we don’t. The extra level of detail restrict us from getting a fast-paced game going.

The ability to choose which Expansion you want to play with - if any - is an awesome concept.

Which expansions do you play with and which did you decide to forgo?

Thanks…SJ

@sjelso:

Which expansions do you play with and which did you decide to forgo?

Expansion - Reasoning

DAK - Gives the German player a real chance of going into Africa.
Seaplanes - More options for hunting subs for the Allies.
Manchuoko - More “dynamic” game in China (we look forward to the Chinese at War Expansion very much).
Sealion - The German player has little incentive to go after UK as it is.
Winter War - To counter Russia crushing Scandinavia.
Turkey - More options regarding the Middle East for all alliances.

We only play the 1939 setup. If we played 1936, we would use Spanish Civil War as well.

Forgo - All others.
We considered Croatia at War, but after scrutinising the rules, we realised it didn’t do anything for the game. It doesn’t matter if there is a partisan or two.

@Munck:

We considered Croatia at War, but after scrutinising the rules, we realised it didn’t do anything for the game. It doesn’t matter if there is a partisan or two.

Interesting. I generally understand your point. In the wide scheme of the game, no real effect.

That said, you don’t think potential railroad supply path disruption in the Balkans/Greece area could be an issue for the Axis? That would probably take many games to really see the difference a lot, but I could see it.

Also, the fact that the Axis would need to garrison some troops in those territories, even if only a few, are that many less to terrorize the Eastern Front :)

Curious, given the fact that you use Turkey at War, you don’t also think using Croatia at War in tandem might be an even bigger thorn? If the Allies or Comintern “win” Turkey, that mixed with partisans in Yugoslavia would prove a decent destabilizing issue in that area of the map. Curious on your thoughts.

@Munck:

We think many of the Expansions go into a unnecessary level of detail. For example: SS Divisions, Minorities at War, almost all 3D printed units. Some people might like the extra detail, but we don’t. The extra level of detail restrict us from getting a fast-paced game going.

The ability to choose which Expansion you want to play with - if any - is an awesome concept.

I’m with you on both of the above.

Some of the expansions, while interesting ideas, went into a bit TOO much detail. SS Divisions, Minorities at War, Elite Fighter Squadrons, while all really interesting ideas, I think are a bit too much here. I think the scale of the game makes adding divisions like these a bit too much. And while I love all the sculpts and what not, having that much extra detail for multiple different units, that all have their own unique abilities, I fear may bog it down too much.

Similar reason to why the Bring in the Heavies expansions don’t interest me too much. There’s already a ton of pieces, adding more large ordnance isn’t something I think it necessarily needs. Same with the Ordnance expansions, though I may tries those at some point.

But you’re right! I LOVE having the options to add things to each game. First, I think it’s a great money making idea on their end. But yea, you can add or take away as you want. Some don’t do it for me (I don’t see myself EVER using Atlantis Rises Again or New Berlin), but others I can’t imagine not using. Turkey at War, DAK, Winter War, Spanish Civil War, Netherlands Fight Back, Croatia, Manchukuo are all automatics for me. Secret subs, Sealion, Gruppe Monsun, Fighting Railways are all serious consideration each time. A bit on the fence for Alaskan Warriors, Oil Wars, but could be convinced :). The rest I haven’t looked at a bunch.

@Chris_Henry:

That said, you don’t think potential railroad supply path disruption in the Balkans/Greece area could be an issue for the Axis? That would probably take many games to really see the difference a lot, but I could see it.

Also, the fact that the Axis would need to garrison some troops in those territories, even if only a few, are that many less to terrorize the Eastern Front :)

Curious, given the fact that you use Turkey at War, you don’t also think using Croatia at War in tandem might be an even bigger thorn? If the Allies or Comintern “win” Turkey, that mixed with partisans in Yugoslavia would prove a decent destabilizing issue in that area of the map. Curious on your thoughts.

You’re right about the first thing. It could be an issue, albeit a rare occurrence.

Germany gets a bunch of SS units for free to deal with partisans. They can’t be used for much else anyway.

We haven’t played with TAW yet - our first game with that Expansion is next week. I see your point, though. Esp. if you look at it from the Axis side. If partisans were to hinder rail movement, the Axis player could not use Turkey to rail units to the Middle East.

For us, it all comes down to this though:

We want to play as “effective” as possible. Also why I made the PDF’s I posted in the beginning of this thread. By being more effective, we get more rounds in a game-day. Doing minuscule things like partisan rolls that doesn’t effect the grand scheme of things takes time. Like the rest of the detail-oriented Expansions. Time we would rather spend going one more round :-)

Yea, was just a thought there really. Could maybe not alter at all. But I could see a combination of the two being a bit of a pain.

I definitely get what you’re saying on being effective! While I totally understand that want, we go a bit further in the other direction. We’ve just accepted that this game will take at least a full weekend, and quite possibly have to remain set up for a time after. We just figure we might as well add some of the cool stuff to it if it’s going to take that long anyways!

@Chris_Henry:

We’ve just accepted that this game will take at least a full weekend, and quite possibly have to remain set up for a time after. We just figure we might as well add some of the cool stuff to it if it’s going to take that long anyways!

I’m jealous! Playing a whole weekend is a luxury we unfortunately can’t afford!  :cry:
We are considering splitting it over multiple days though - but that is to try the 1936 setup.

Haha don’t get me wrong, it’s the very reason we can’t get many games in either! It revolves around whenever my wife is out of town for a whole weekend basically! We’re hoping to clear some space soon, and find a more permanent larger table top that we can use to keep the game set up for longer periods of time. We know it can’t stay on my dad’s dining table indefinitely, which is why we try start to finish in a whole weekend!

This game is the exact reason I purchased a table that can be covered up to “store” a game like this.

This game wasn’t created yet but it’s exactly what I bought the table for originally to have a place to keep a game set up.

Then it’s a normal dinner table during the week.

@thenorthman:

This game is the exact reason I purchased a table that can be covered up to �store� a game like this.

This game wasn�t created yet but it�s exactly what I bought the table for originally to have a place to keep a game set up.

Then it�s a normal dinner table during the week.

I thought about this. I myself am so busy I am lucky to play once or twice a year. If you can seal up your game you can just pick up where you left off even a few months later.

Do you have any pictures of your table?

@Cornelius:

@thenorthman:

This game is the exact reason I purchased a table that can be covered up to �store� a game like this.

This game wasn�t created yet but it�s exactly what I bought the table for originally to have a place to keep a game set up.

Then it�s a normal dinner table during the week.

I thought about this. I myself am so busy I am lucky to play once or twice a year. If you can seal up your game you can just pick up where you left off even a few months later.

Do you have any pictures of your table?

Agreed, I’d love to see some pictures if you are able!

I’ll get GW 36 set up then take some photos.

I noticed on the sheets that FALLSCHIRMJÄGER was listed as a separately entry right above Airborne.  With higher defense and attack values.

Was that just a personal thing or was that in one of the expansions?  AM I just being blind? Also saw it has a limit of one per turn.  SO sounds like something from the game but just making sure….

@thenorthman:

Was that just a personal thing or was that in one of the expansions?  AM I just being blind? Also saw it has a limit of one per turn.  SO sounds like something from the game but just making sure….

They originated from the Sealion expansion.

@Munck:

@thenorthman:

Was that just a personal thing or was that in one of the expansions?  AM I just being blind? Also saw it has a limit of one per turn.  SO sounds like something from the game but just making sure….

They originated from the Sealion expansion.

Ahhh, I didn’t even think to check that!  Perfect!

Thank you all for your work on these player aids!