Using the Global War 1914 Diplomacy Model In G40?

Is it possible for this game to be set it up so that every country could fight on it’s on; with one country destroying everyone else as the only victory condition? Say, combine Italy and France (with Spain and Portugal?) and let them go first? Britain goes 2nd? And perhaps add about 1 guy to every Chinese territory? What would the outcome of THAT game look like?

I’m a bit late coming to this discussion thread, and my comments will just relate to one point from your original post, in which you were commenting that “the current way to deal with neutral nations is not good and makes the playing feel simulated.”  I quite agree that the game’s division of non-player countries into three types of neutrals (pro-Allied, pro-Axis and strict) and its two types of rules for neutrals (one for the pro-type neutrals and one for the strict neutrals) is problematic in several ways, particularly the rule which says that every strict neutral state in the world joins side X when one of these states is attacked by side Y.  A point that should be kept in mind, however, is the reason why those rules exist.  The reason for the existance of the rules makes a certain amount of historic sense, even though the actual mechanism of the rules is arguable

I don’t think the rules actually state the rationale explicitly, but it seems clear – based on an examination of which countries have which type of neutral status – that the neutrals rules are meant to strongly encourage (one notch below “force”) the players to replicate some of the historical events of WWII which occured after the game’s 1940 start date.  These situations include certain countries fighting alongside the Axis powers as co-belligerents (examples: Finland and Iraq) and certain countries being pitched into the Allied side either because they were invaded by the Axis (examples: Yugoslavia and Greece) or because they were preemptively invaded by the Allies over concerns that their current government was too sympathetic to the Axis (example: Persia / Iran).  As for the very unrealistic “every strict neutral state in the world joins side X when one of these states is attacked by side Y” rule, it’s basically a blunt instrument aimed at keeping all the player powers out of the states that managed to stay neutral in WWII.  And to reinforce the message, the neutral states are given different-sized “keep out” signs (the size of their standing armies) to underline which ones the players are particularly discouraged from invading.  Turkey, with its standing army of 8, comes at the top of the list – nor surprisingly, because Turkey offers a potential link-up between the war in North Africa and the war in Southern Europe and the USSR.

IMO using real WWII rationale for China VS Japan does not compute in Axis and Allies because A&A does not use terrain. The #1 reason Japan did not take all of China in the real war was because of terrain. South West China is all mountains. North West China is dessert that is the second largest desert in the world. Also that desert is a nightmare scenario in winter. There is also this huge mountain chain coming up the west side of the China that is ignored.

SO

If you want to change up the status quo in China in respect to Japan I would offer this. Using game mechanics in the game.

You use Impassible territories.

You put up a Impassible territory between Khazashistan and Novobirisk. The only way Japan can get into Russia then is to invade Timguska.  So, you now force Japan to focus on the north which brings into play the Russia far east forces to resist them. It also forces Japan to diffuse their air power to the north. Which then brings up a choice Japan has to make. Go north with air power and leave India to build up and resist Japan.

@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.

This is based on the assumption that if one nation gets an arms breakthrough, the odds are that it will be easier for other nations will get it too, by copying it. Â

We have done this before - at the start of the game pass out a “copy” card to each player.

Say your opponent gets something really good like heavy bombers, or the Atomic Bomb or some house rule thing that could wreck you. Roll for an arms breakthrough as normal. If you get a six, instead of rolling for which random breakthrough you get, you now have the option of playing your “copy” card and copying something that is already on the board.

This helps keep the game competitive and less luck driven. It also adds a bit of strategy. Do you want to use your card to copy those super subs now or hold onto it in case someone gets long range aircraft? Decisions, decisions…

For long lists of custom Arms Breakthroughs, pass out two cards each.   Â

Germany:
http://www.mediafire.com/?duc0i56nloytkr0

Japan:
http://www.mediafire.com/?p17vuxrevhd9c76

Italy:
http://www.mediafire.com/?86c8pi8ghttdmnq

Soviet Union:
http://www.mediafire.com/?4un2eblj2z5p7c3

USA: China/ ANZAC
http://www.mediafire.com/?axixf35q3zn1s1c

UK:
http://www.mediafire.com/?5kwbnbiwey8aci1

This uses all the Alpha rules except as follows:

On the first turn all Allied Naval and Air units defend at ONE. Land units fight normally.

2)The Japanese may attack the Soviets only by announcing one turn before this intention. The Soviets can attack japan only if all Soviet territory’s are under Soviet control.

The new turn order: Soviet Union, Axis, Allies

Lend Lease: The US or UK player can send income to the Soviet Union. Procedure: Buy a transport(s) and place it off board in a Lend lease Box. These transports can’t be used for any other purpose and the Allied player can just exchange them back to IPC’s as he wishes. Roll one D6 for each transport and place the IPC’s under the transports in the holding box. This money is deducted from a players treasury and the Lend Lease can never exceed a total of 30 IPC’s

Interdiction: Any axis Submarine, Plane, or Surface ship located in open sea ( not Baltic, Black, Mediterranean) can deduct 2 IPC each from this total. If they are located in a convoy box, they can cost 3 IPC each from this total.

Minor Axis Allies: Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary have unique forces ( use German pieces) these automatically join the axis on turn 2. They can freely move on that turn and Germany can move into them or build units ( Romania).

No please post what you got then everybody can jump in and discuss it.

If you can post a link to pictures of the map with pieces it will help convey the idea better.

just post a link for it.

I played a lot of wargame but now i only play with WAW.

AL.