Global 1943 Expansion, Revised

@SuperbattleshipYamato I have played a few games and though the Axis can initially worry the Allies , (I thought I would lose ), I have always been able to keep the income gap and , as the game progresses, it opens up much more .
I don’t believe , The Allies don’t need help in this game, if the players are equal ability.

We play Afghanistan as a Strict Neutral. Only Russia in game can influence.
But we do have an event card if drawn the Afghanistan’s become hostile Guerillas ( Japan Influencers ) like they did in WW 2 and attacked UK/FEC/Indian ground troops.

Have 4 inf there.

Hello, I have been scrolling threw the HBG website and have found many interesting custom units with either no rules, or a rules pdf that is no longer available. I had a few ideas, and I would love feedback/more ideas.

Mercenary’s - 1IPC/turn/infantry, max 3. This could be cool feature if you need temporary forces in a certain area you could hire mercenarys for 2-3 turns, but if you just left them there it would cost you way more money then they are worth.

Assassins - Infantry that cost 5 IPC, get a target select on 1 on a D12 against a commander (Commanders expansion set)

Military Police - I was thinking they could increase rail transport, and decrease partisan activity. or they could allow transit on damaged rail.

I would love feedback, and more ideas.

@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!

Hello,

I have Revised and a friend of me has the Spring42 Version. We prefer the newer Rules of Spring42 with the additional cruisers, “better” transporter rules and so on. But the board of Revised seems to be better, bigger and with more detail.

Now we plan to play on the Revised board (with Revised setup) with the Spring42 rules.

Has anyone of you did this before or has any ideas if this is feasible and playable?

Thank you very much!

Hi all,

Been a long time reader on the boards, but this is my first time posting! Been an avid AA player and history buff for a long time. Sorry to post here at such a later date, but I wanted to get an opinion.

My take on adding Canada to the game without too much drastic effects on the playability involved a couple of moving parts.

Give Canada the 7 ipc income of the Canadian territories to spend each turn, but that same ipc value still counts towards the UK as well, with the UK also able to build from IC’s there.

Do the same thing for South Africa, giving them both South Africa territories and Rhodesia for a 4 ipc total. Again, UK still controls the money as well, with UK also able to build from IC’s there.

Both Commonwealths still play as part of the UK, buy, move, combat, etc. Essentially just adding 11 ipc income.

To counter this so it’s not unfair to the Axis, do the same thing with Romania, Finland, Bulgaria, and Hungary (Slovakia-Hungary on the map of course). Those four powers would have a total of 9 ipc value between them. I figured the extra two ipc’s would have minimal effect.

Essentially all I did was add ipc’s and therefore troop numbers to the game, just forcing them to be used at their respective locales.

My only thought with this was would the immediacy of the minor Axis powers being on the front lines basically effect gameplay on the Eastern Front more so than the added Commonwealth powers would in Africa and Europe? I don’t want to hurt the USSR unfairly.

Any feedback would be great! Glad to finally post and be a part of the community!

I’ll be able to post set up this weekend any comments on it will help

Why is Uk 23 and also Can I use this rule for Canada on 1940 2nd?