Differences between 1st and 2nd edition global gamboard?

Bear in mind, the land units on the transport only act on their Turn.

@krieghund said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

@andrewaagamer said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

Two ways to look at this:

Reason A is dominant and supersedes and cancels any other Reason. (Which leads to your ruling) Reason A is limited to the Soviet/Japan conflict and does not override Reason B which leads to my statement.

The first way is correct, as indicated by the phrase, “In all other respects and for all other purposes”.

Ahhh, I didn’t put enough emphasis on “In all other respects and for all other purposes”. That makes more sense to me now.

The tipping point for me is if Reason A is dominant than if any other Allied Power rather than Russia, (US, UK, ANZAC or France), attacks Mongolia, Mongolia WOULD NOT turn Pro-Axis. This goes against every other instance regarding Neutrality in the rules. A standard is if a Neutral is attacked it becomes Pro to the opposing factions.

Yes, that’s true, but Mongolia is an exceptional case. Its ties to the USSR against Japan are so strong that an attack upon it by another Allied power would not change its stance to pro-Axis, and it would remain strict neutral. The same is true if an Allied power attacks another strict neutral.

Wow - that’s cool. THANKS for explaining that!!!

Kamikaze are a defensive weapon, which are resolved at the beginning of the combat phase, so the attacking air units have already launched from their carriers are not in danger (unless they are “guest” air units). As such, they will participate in combat even if their carrier is hit, and will have the remainder of their movement to land as normal afterwards.

@corporal:

  I have the Global 1939 from Historical Boardgaming….was wondering if anyone has come up with a '39 setup for Global 1940

Go to House rule forum and look at the AARHE rules files, its a sticky.

@CWO:

@Whitshadw:

Again I love the idea but the way they set it up looks like a 8 year old picked the colors and the map needs a incredible update.

I have a copy of Superpowers, and frankly the only thing about it that I really like are the little white missile sculpts, which I use as A&A atomic bombs.  (I put them horizontally in small plastic stands that I pulled from a different game.)  There are just eight of them, and considering that they came as part of a whole game with lots of other sculpts (none of which I use), this reflects nicely the rarity and high cost of WWII atomic weapons.

Back around the 1980s or so, there was a WWIII-themed global game called Supremacy.  It had some cool features, but it eventually faded from the scene, apparently because of two flaws: a simplistic economic model that could easily be manipulated, and a tendency to “go nuclear” that would end the game (the same kind of problem mentioned by rjpeters).

Funny. I too pretty much bought the game for parts originally and I thought of using the map for my own game idea.

Just have fun. These games can be very long… Which is why I like to go wild in live games.

prepare to invade london with germany, remember to buy a carrier and 2 transports for the first round or carrier destroyer sub. Second round if you have not purchased a destroyer on the first, buy one and the rest transports. prepare to invade!

Have italy kill the french naval or ram into the stuff by gibraltar, because you don’t want that defending london.

Sea lion is real fast, you get london on germany round 3 or you don’t. Russia pushes in europe and you kick him out or you don’t. Simple as that.

As far as Japan goes, that is up to you.  The simplest strategy is to draw an imaginary line from Japan to calcutta… and take everything along the way and the dutch islands.

@17Mark71:

Yes I know the rest of them surrendered, but if the Germans haven’t invaded France yet then Dunkirk hasn’t happened yet……right?

look, dunkirk is some 10 or 20 kilometers from belgium. no real distance, though. ;)

and: IT IS JUST A GAME! :D (a really good one!)

@mwindianapolis:

how about just toss for them?

UFC cage match in the back yard!  :evil:  :-D