Global 1943 Expansion, Revised

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Moscow has fallen, how do I recover?:

You tie up more working capitol of fast movers trying to shuttle from South Africa towards the front lines than it would have cost to build a factory or two right near the battle lines in the Middle East.

You can accelerate movement with a couple transports and a naval base, but again this is expensive. Also vulnerable to German or Japanese bombers.

The only reason not to have Middle East allied factories is if you have to fall all them way back to Egypt but still have a chance to stay competitive with a strong Western European foothold, such as liberating Paris or Rome.

Well depends what you do with the egypt transport you start with. If you just add 1 additional transport you already got your supply chain there for 2/3th of a factory.

But yea your right that they are verry volnerable to air attacks but can be usefull in mopping up italian forces in your rear areas.

@general-spengler Very interesting. I think having conscripts cost only $1 and be totally unable to attack is both a little sleepy and tends to give too much of an advantage to the defenders.

What about conscripts that cost $2, move 1, defend at 1 each, and attack at 1 as a stack? In other words, no matter how many conscripts you have in an attack, they all collectively only roll one die per round of battle, which only hits if the die is a 1.

This should naturally discourage players from building too many conscripts, since a stack of 5 conscripts is less cost-efficient than a single conscript.

You could also limit production of conscripts to 1 per factory and/or recruiting center per round. So if you have both a factory and a recruiting center in the same territory, you could buy up to 2 conscripts there per turn. If you have only a factory or only a recruitment center, then you could only buy 1 conscript per turn in that territory.

But other than that I haven’t seen any errors so great work! They’re especially good for newbies since it has the NOs and Political situations

@Argothair:

I think I’m shooting for something in between those two extremes, Caesar. We have a rough idea of the manpower reserves of each nation – so maybe nations can only purchase X infantry per turn at the low cost of 3 IPCs per unit, and then after that they have to pay a higher cost of 3.5 IPCs or 4 IPCs per unit? And then X can vary by nation based on what we know about the nations’ manpower.

E.g.
China – 20 infantry / turn
Russia – 18 infantry / turn
America – 16 infantry / turn
UK Pacific – 14 infantry / turn
Germany – 12 infantry / turn
Japan – 10 infantry / turn
UK Europe – 8 infantry / turn
Italy, France, ANZAC – 6 infantry / turn

I’m not saying that’s accurate; that’s just an illustration of the level of detail that interests me. Other players might be interested in more detail or less detail than that.

Not a bad idea but China and Russia will never have issues because 20 Chinese infantry equal $60, literally larger than the possible total value it can have unless you’re working a rule where China can leave their territories. I think 18 infantry for USSR would be $54 which is larger than it’s own national worth unless it captures Axis territories which the excuse for that is now it has more population to use.

@Charles-de-Gaulle

I noticed that you don’t allow the US to activate Brazil when neutral in another game (your blog). Would you say that applies to your rules as well? Thank you!

Just finished a game with the Europe only setup. Had to make a few modifications (changed the artillery piece in Paris to a tank and the artillery in Western Germany to a mech; pulled a few subs/tanks from my 1941 game) due to the Germany setup requiring more pieces than the game comes with. Other than that, had an absolute blast, definitely seemed balanced. Thanks.

@Der:

Hi Marc -

I put in the possibility of removal of the chips in case the player was faced with a huge attacking force and wanted to withdraw everything but did not want the enemy to capture and use all of his entrenchment. (kind of a scorched earth thing)

I put some entrenchment in the Causasus because on my map Stalingrad is located there. I didn’t put any in Hitler’s Atlantic wall because my map starts in 1942 and the player can always add some later. Plus the German player gets an automatic 3 entrenchment anyway when the Allies try to land from the sea.    Â

Okay, thanks for the clarifications.  About the scorched earth thing, the ideal technique (and I’m just kidding here) would be to wait until the attacking enemy infantry falls into the abandoned entrenchments, then to fill in the trenches by blasting their walls with pre-set charges of TNT.  Sort of killing two birds with one stone.  :-D  In fairness, U.S. troops sometimes used a variation of this technique in the Pacific.  When confronted with a particularly tough dug-in Japanese position that would cost a lot of American casulties to clear by conventional assault methods, the troops would simply use a bulldozer to fill it in or collapse it.

I had an idea to calculate an axis win at the end of each full game turn

Each capital held is worth 3 points (india counts as a capital)
Each other victory city is 2 points
Each completed national objective is 1 point.

Total up on Germany’s turn, on Japans turn and Italy’s turn.
Lets just spitball and say, if the axis number is 31, if they score 31 at any time during rounds 5-10 they win.

For the allies to win, they need to bring the axis down to a certain number, lets say 15

As the game goes on, the numbers get closer to eachother, so lets look at it this way

Turns 5-10
Axis wins with 31 points, lose if they fall below 15 points
Turns 11-15
Axis wins with 27 points, lose if they fall below 19 points
Turns 16-20
Axis wins with 24 points, lose if they fall below 21 points