A&A 1940 Global - Classic 1984 Reference Charts

@bakerbei I thought the Nimitz card was great for Global until you read the booklet and it says it doesn’t apply to seazones w/ naval bases. Which makes it really not that effective since most of the game you are staging and protecting naval bases. I think it would be really interesting if it let you get the 4th movement point. In fact I think I am going to just ignore the booklet rule and allow the Nimitz card to use the naval bases.

@ando101

I wasn’t saying that your idea was bad.

But yes, that makes sense.

@nubnumber1
Correct. The airbase rules only apply to the units on that land space - they do not apply to units in adjacent spaces.

@SEP try this one he has just started doing 3d printed. http://iwillnevergrowup.com/shop/index.php?route=product%2Fcategory&path=62_93

I’m reviewing all Vichy rules available out there, as I plan to make a unique mod, because I like historical realism and simplicity, with minimized luck of dice, and some “asymmetric balance”.

Some major points I’ve posted elsewhere in the forum:

The main issue for this expansion is how to develop French neutrality, while at the same time providing a bonus to Germany. Apparently ignored by most players, in real life (IRL), Germany economically exploited Vichy, which had to richly sustain 300,000 German troops stationed in Northern France. Therefore, in the game, it only makes total sense that Germany gets the 3 IPCs from Vichy Southern France.

Another related major issue is what to do with French colonies in terms of neutrality/occupation and IPC flows. I agree that the Vichy setup should reflect what happened IRL: North Africa, Syria, and Indochina go to Vichy, while other French colonies stay Free. However, it messes up Italy’s incursions into North Africa (as IRL, Hitler denied French colonies to Italy). I’m not sure yet as to the best approach to subjecting these colonies to invasion, occupation, and who gains IPCs (other than agreeing that Japan has easy access “rights” over Vichy Indochina), and also remote units…

Germany never fought Vichy. IRL, with Operation Torch, Germany simply occupied Vichy in 1942, with no resistance whatsoever. Vichy units were disbanded. That can be also the case in the game. Just remove Vichy units.

The uncertainty surrounding local pre-battles is quite interesting (will Vichy troops welcome or resist Allies in North Africa?..). However, I’d try to minimize dice randomness that is often used to decide some outcome. IRL, Vichy troops (just like Italians) surrendered as soon as seeing enemy superiority: thus, in the game, if Allies send more land + air units than defending Vichy units, then there should be no battle but quick surrender. Or, make it highly unlikely that a battle would ensue (for example, need to roll a 1).

I’m now working on my own house rules, for an expansion (HBG lingo) that is quite realistic, fun yet simple. If anyone is interested, let me know and I’ll be happy to share my rules when ready…

phd_angel@yahoo.com

Chicago, December 2020

@Ichabod:

@Sovietishcat:

Since I have joined Triplea, I had more success playing with no bid than bid.

Do you think that’s because when you get a bid you bite off more than you can chew, or did you play the same?

I see you often do Taranto, SZ 96, and Ethiopia. If you don’t change a thing, but still accept a bid and use it just for those battles, then it I’d think you’d be just as successful. Should just increase the odds of those battles. A bid might lead to UK Europe sending fighters to Moscow quicker while the US and company hammer Japan.

Actually I have played differently with no bid and I started to put more pressure in Pacific first and it seems to work out better, because lot of times seems like the Japan player starts panicking and do not know what to do or gets offcourse in their plans… The only time I have struggled is against you Icha :)

Over a year ago, there was a discussion thread somewhere on this forum (I can’t recall in what section) about GTO’s demise.  As I recall, GTO was supposedly saying that it was shutting down temporarily and that it would return sometime in the following year with a new game that it would be offering in some kind of partnership with Larry Harris rather than WotC.  The details were quite vague, and nothing seems to have come of that initiative…assuming that it was indeed an initiative that had any substance to it, rather than just speculation.

@Young:

The split is less confusing because they are different coloured units with their own nation and turn sequence, so it’s the same as ANZAC infantry in Egypt with UK pieces.

Lol. I do own physical copies of each game but you can tell how often I’ve played them :)