What is the most unusual/annoying/strange allied bid

Just finished up a game a couple days ago with some friends, and it always seems to come down to a valiant last stand at Moscow followed by either an admission of defeat or (as is the case with the game we played) Italy is contained and the Allies can still hold Egypt to some extent.

That is an interesting idea that could be considered when the Germans look as though they are a couple turns away from taking Moscow. I’m not sure I’d do it just because of the amount of time to move those infantry would make it totally obvious to the Axis what you were doing. At that point you are completely giving up Russia’s IPC income to the Axis which is not very wise. The advantage to this Alamo battle is that the Axis also lose a lot of units and Germany remains licking it’s proverbial wounds for a turn of the game at least.

So while it’s interesting and I have never considered it, I’m not sure it would be worth it.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned it’s that for allies there are no half measures…

At least playing against equal or stronger opponents

In any case, Japan must be crushed (above all) as well as Italy.

If you aim for a KGF and let Japan rage in the Pacific there is always the risk that with a coup they will be able to take the 6 VC and the game is over… even if the Allies are close to taking Rome or Berlin

Of course if you only tighten up on the Pacific perhaps also using the Russians (right @MrRoboto? :))… you have to be very organized in Europe to avoid Hitler arriving in Cairo (or London)…

Very expert players are able to do this of course… but in my opinion there is always a percentage of risk that the game predicts (like all clashes on A&A) but which you can try to avoid.

And above all the Allies should fight in a more aggressive way (which I have not yet learned to do) but not recklessly… aggressive in the sense of making the Axis risk more than necessary in certain battles (land and naval) because otherwise the the outcome is almost always for the Central Powers of the board.

@trulpen

right on. It’s a good way to test things. Yea the AI doesn’t play global real well. It does pretty good on some other games. You can give it extra dough. That makes it harder but still would do weird stuff

Thanks for the review.  Never hurts to be on the winning side.  So I hear…. :|

Yes, this is the case in Alpha +2.

@larrymarx:

@kcdzim:

I’d prefer a solution were russia is required abide the cease fire regardless of war in europe , but allow Japan to break it whenever they please (which still doesn’t cause war with the other axis powers).  Russia just has to make sure it will be costly for Japan, which is precisely what they did with the far east forces.

How about doing this but also allowing Russia to break the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact if Japan chooses to attack early?

The game already favors the allies.  Allowing Russia to preemptively strike isn’t helpful for balance on the Europe side.  However, barring russia from attacking japan first, under any circumstance, probably means Japan won’t bother with russia at all with no need to garrison and will focus on china first, while positioning for the J3 assault which matches far more closely the way AAP40 plays (where russia isn’t available to attack, and won’t attack Japan).

the 18 infantry already is pretty good about giving Japan pause on J1.  J2, it becomes more feasable, but even then Russia can back away and just leave the shorelines open, giving up minimal value.  I just don’t buy that Russia needs more freedom to attack.  While Stalin was of the mind of striking when either axis was vulnerable, the player is NOT the Stalin, and some safeguards like restricted declarations have to be in place so that the game can be balanced.  Otherwise it’s not 1940, it’s 1942.

In my perfect world:

A) Russia cannot attack or enter ORIGINAL UK or US territories ever.  Russia just shouldn’t be in India.  or the UK.  They can take Persia, they can take neutrals, and they can conquer ORIGINAL axis territories to their hearts content.  And even though it’s unlikely, they can help in France.  Frankly, if Russia is in position to take a european french territory, the game is either over, or has gone pearshaped, but this way they can get a token Syria.

B)UK & US units cannot enter ORIGINAL Russian territories ever.  If they do, they are removed (thus cannot defend), a marker takes their place, and Russia has the option to purchase that equiv unit during their purchase phase at half price rounded up (this is lend lease/pilot internment).

C) Russia can attack & control any neutral it pleases at start of game.  No neutral is friendly to Russia - they will all be combat moves, and they will always defend, even if Pro Ally.  Unless strict neutrals are changed to affect regions (unlikely), same rules as OOB for strict neutrals.

D) Russia cannot attack Japan until Berlin falls or Japan declares war on them.  They cannot enter China until at war with Japan (historically, they were still aiding china after the Cease fire in '39, but stopped after the Pact in 41.  However, since the Tigers weren’t in China until 41 (essentially taking over for the russian air group), the single fighter can be abstracted to be considered the Russian air group at the beginning of the game

E) OOB political rules for Italy/Germany.

SHARED THIS ON LARRY’S SITE ALREADY, JUST WANTED TO SHARE THOUGHTS HERE ALSO:

Ok Larry,

Me and an official playtester of yours here in Michigan (his name is mentioned in the rulebook for Europe 40) played Global with the new setup given with all the aircraft taken away and such. Here was a short summary of what happened:

On the Europe side:

Germany played pretty predictably, sinking most of the UK navy, taking France and the Eastern European pro-allied and pro-axis neutrals with Italy. They continued to build on their air force to keep the UK from building ships right away. Began to stack some ground units as well. Italy expanded into Africa and shored the Middle East slowly controlling the Med.

UK responded by NOT attcking the Italian navy and pulling back the rest of the navy it had left until it could come back to England with a strong navy that included the US. UK took the Pro-allied Brazil and shucked the troops to Africa to help the SAfrican force which slowly pushed the Italians back up to Egypt turning the tide in Africa.

Russia stedily built a force consisting of infantry spiced with some tanks, artillery, tacs and mechs. Stacking behind some dead zones and waiting for the declaration of war.

US spent about 70-80% of its cash in the Pacific since it could not even approach Africa/Europe before a state of war.

Now for the Pacific side:

India with little cash built mostly infantry and stacked. Combined navy near India and activated the Persian troops to bring back and help defend India. In Global, India has a little more help from some extra troops west and a few ships, including one French destroyer to help defend. Also, it can fall back with its stack to West India if needed.

ANZAC naval base is much needed and I am glad it is there- balances nicely.

China was stonger, but does what it normally does and stacks at Yunnan to wait to wear down Japs. China units are really used as a delaying tactic for the India crush.

Japan didn’t see an advantage to the India crush in J1 but felt that the initiative came to them in J2. They didn’t want to wait until J3 because they felt the Allies would have established a long-term defense of India. So with that the Japs declared war on J2 taking back the Dutch East Indies and unleashing the fury. Japan built transports J1 and J2 and built more planes to replace the ones missing from the new setup in J2.

Now even though both Japs and Allies have the same amount of planes removed, Japan can build them faster and move them closer to the action (India). US could also build their planes back but it takes them longer to get them to the battle scene (India). Brit India and ANZAC can’t build much of an airforce because of the typhoon of Jap units coming fast, so India stacks and ANZAC tries to distract and/or try to send some units.

Japan can make the US wait longer to send ships and planes down to ANZAC by using its navy as a shield. I as Allies, I made tactical blunder ruining my chance to meet the Jap onslaught of India from behind through Australia. However, if not for this the setup seems very balanced and gave some options to both sides.

A hot topic question will be “what to do with the Russian inf on the Pacific side??”
It is very frustrating for the Russians, if you attack immediately, Japan will bring the heat to wipe them out with now China and Russia give large concessions to Japan $$$. If you stack and sit. Japan has to garrison Manchu with a small force but continues to spearhead to India. I figure as the Russians, you have to attack with the 18 inf at some point. The hard part is when. Timing is everything in this decision.

With US entering the war at turn 2, the US began to throw a good amount of cash to the European side, mainly because of the blunder in the Pacific- India would not last long now- 2-3 more rounds. I recovered nicely putting pressure on the French coast quickly until I made another tactical error involving Gibraltar- arrggh!!!- new rules and new map takes a little while getting used to.  :-(

Besides these 2 blunders, I thought the Global game was pretty fair and balanced with a slight edge to the Allies. I definitely think the Allies are a little easier to play because that sides is spilt into 6 sub parts (countries) that are easy to prepare while you are waiting for the Axis to finish. The Axis with so many more units in the beginning, take longer and you have to be very efficient both in the short-term and the long-term planning.

Anyway that was are anaylsis so I hope it helps.  :-)

Nice, well with depreciation of the dollar I would say that would probably be about what I pay for something like that as well. I will have to do some digging to find a place that does that, because I do admit that the ridges irritate me, not to mention the board separating from time to time if someone hits the edge or something.