Global 1943 Expansion, Revised

@general-6-stars Yes, I would like to see that.

@general-spengler said in [Global 1940] Units Expansion Set:

Also if anyone has thoughts on the values (particularly cost) and if they seem balanced that would be good info as well.

Good action here. Global 40 House Rules has Escort CVs at C 9. I figured at 10, you’d just buy a 2 hit Fleet CV at 16 instead, although Italy or ANZAC might still buy one. There’s also an option that gives them ASW ability as well to encourage buys.

board 3659 has them moving only 1 +1 w/NB. In my tests Italy buys them and sometimes ANZAC, but not really anybody else. I just test against myself though. I still like them and think they’re a cool unit.

The Conscripts are A0 D1 C2 max build of 8. Can conquer empty TTYs though. They get spammed otherwise. I think with your limit of 2 per turn and using the Recruitment Centers are good ideas to limit that though as well as not being able to attack.

I always stick em in the front line and use them as bullet stoppers lol. Russia really likes em.

These could be added to the House Rules Mod for triplea if you want. Idk if you use triplea or not, but it’s real good for testing stuff from a time standpoint even if you prefer the physical board.

Once again, Good Action : )

@The-Captain

I would love to hear more about your Most Precious Soviet Strategies. I love talking about strategy, especially if it’s about my favorite power when it comes to tactical decision making 😀

@barnee

Naval Mines are ignored by LCV.

Mind you, you could pair your reduction of IPC values with a reduction in the number of units on the board at the start of the game. How much you would have to remove is something you would have to play out several times in order to get the balance right. I suspect this would start moving away from “easy fix” and moving towards “might as well be a different game”.

Such is gaming.

-Midnight_Reaper

My friend and I have been developing some rules for a Free For All on the Global 40 Board. Each country has a special unit and unique national objectives. Here is a rough outline, let me know what you think:

Countries:
Germany - 30 IPCs - Blitzkrieg Ability
Russia - 37 IPCs - Movable Factories & Factories placeable anywhere (movement of 1)
Japan - 26 IPCs - Yamato (24 IPCs, 3 hits to kill, 4 - 4 combat value)
America - 52 IPCs - Marines (4 IPCs, 2 - 2 combat value, +1 attack during amphibious assaults, destroyers & cruisers have can carry 1 each similarly to a transport)
Communist China - 4 IPCs - Cavalry (4 IPCs 2 - 1 combat value, can move two spaces, no blitz)
China - 9 IPCs - Cavalry (4 IPCs 2 - 1 combat value, can move two spaces, no blitz)
United Kingdom - 21 IPCs - Commando (5 IPCs, 2 - 3 combat value, can be paradropped by a bomber in which the first hostile territory the bomber goes over it has to be dropped, or can just be a noncombat)
Italy - 10 IPCs - Armoured Car - (5 IPCs, 3 - 2 combat value, can blitz)
ANZAC - 10 IPCs - Commando
Canada - 7 IPCs - Commando
India/FEC - 17 IPCs - Gurkhas (4 IPCs, 2 - 3 combat value)
France - 19 IPCs - Fortifications (5 IPCs, up to 3 per territory, +5 IPCs for every existing fortification in the territory, enemy armies cannot blitz through and enemy infantry cannot pair with artillery)
Netherlands - 12 IPCs - Colonial Infantry - (3 IPCs, can place in any originally owner territory)
Middle East - 8 IPCs - Jihad - Does not have to wait a turn after declaring war
Nordic States - 5 IPCs - Finnish Winter Soldiers - (3 IPCs, 1 - 3 combat value, no enemy blitz)
South American Federation - 8 IPCs - T-Boats (4 IPCs, can carry 1 unit, 3 movements)

Rules:
Ideally each country is controlled by one player.
All nations begin at peace; war takes 1 turn to declare.
Each country has its own national objectives.
Some units have been changed around with the setups; however, the majority of the setups have remained the same.
If you conquer a country you may choose to puppet a portion of it.
There are no pre-established alliances.
When two nations are at peace they gain a trade bonus.
Countries may form alliances, non-aggression pacts, request military access, declare war, and lend lease.
Oil derricks give the controlling power 1D6 roll of IPCs.

I’ve always felt the same way as the jetset. For me the dice rules are an important part of the narrative aspect of the game. They allow for more surprises or turn arounds or crushing upsets at the last minute, the kind of thing that allows you to build out a uniqur story around what just happened in a given combat.

I understand the appeal of Low Luck, but the gameplay is substantially different.  A build or combat strategy that is guaranteed to come off in LL, could fail miserably in a dice game. Sure you might be able to model averages for expected results using an LL scheme to map your strategy in a dice game, but there’s always a chance that the dice end up disagreeing with you ‘that time.’

In that respect I don’t see a huge amount of cross over. Playing 100 dice games won’t really prepare you or teach you a whole lot about what to expect in an LL game. As mentioned before low luck alters a lot of things, with respect to deadzoning and strafing, the number of defensive units required to back down an attack entitely, the way the airblitz works, the way anti aircraft fire works, etc. Just too many differences to really say that a strategy that anticipates the one style of combat is going to graph onto the other consistently.

I think after playing a few games, most players are able to determine which style of gameplay they prefer. If you love the consistency of LL, and hate the unpredictably of dice, then wait for a match with another LL player. If you hate LL, but love dice, then wait for a match against a dice player. Especially in a long game like global, if you start a playing with a combat system you dislike, then chances are that the game won’t be very satisfying for you. There are enough players out there who enjoy both ways of playing that you can probably find a likeminded opponent if you just stick it out for a little while.

To the initial question about why LL isn’t used more often, the answer is probably just because the manual doesn’t offer a description of how Low Luck works, or provide the kind official endorsement for that combat system that would probably be necessary for a larger groundswell of support. In regular tournament play it foes have a bit more cache, since that is where the systemperature was first put into practice… Fortunately for those who do enjoy Low Luck, tripleA  created simple “click tab” option in the game options menu, that allows any game to be played with universal LL rules, which I think has done a lot to popularize that style of play. There are also tripleA scenerios out there which were designed from the ground up with the LL playstyle in mind, which helps. I don’t know if the G40 designers took LL into account when they created the set up. If it was designed for LL, I imagine some of starting unit distributions might have been a little different. But again the game is pretty flexible, so even a game that wasn’t created with LL in mind, can still be adapted pretty easily, although the playtime required or the usual bids might be slightly different.

As a huge fan of Imp Games’ East & West, these kinds of games always intrigue me. It’s set in 1948, so there are some similarities to the '46 scenario.

IMHO, 1948 is sort of the high-water mark for NATO (i.e. the European empires) however, East & West is a bit non-historical in this sense.

• NATO was not formed until 1949
• Turkey and Greece did not join NATO until 1952, but are part of the Alliance in-game
• Pakistan, India, and Burma were all independent of Britain in 1948; in E&W they are still part of the empire, and a huge thorn in the side of the USSR
• The breakdown of Indonesia between Dutch-controlled areas and independent(ish) ones is not in line with history

The other high-water mark of the Cold War (based on my research) is around 1975-76. Off the top of my head:

• The Vietnam War was over; Cuba, Afghanistan, Angola, Mozambique, and Ethiopia were all ruled by communist regimes. The USSR (or Warsaw Pact) was at the height of its influence
• The Arab League had expanded across all of north Africa; the Islamic Conference also greatly increased its membership around this time
• The Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) including Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan, as well as the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) including Thailand, Philippines, Australia and New Zealand were still in existence, supported by the major NATO powers of the US, UK, and France
• China had annexed Tibet and fought a small war with India

I’ve done work on 1975-76 scenarios for both the Original A&A as well as E&W and have done a fair bit of study on the cold war era “map” so to speak. If anyone wants to discuss the subject/games here or in a PM, I’d be very happy to respond. :-)