Advice to Renegade! What is on your top 10 for adjustments to G40 3rd edition?

The Waffen-SS Panzer General unit and 1st Waffen-SS Panzer Army are now included in the rules for these events:

@GigaSmoot Hey, since no one has answered yet, I figured I could leave you some feedback… Although take it with a grain of salt, because I am not that experienced in Global 1940.

First, I really like the idea of simplified National Objectives! It is true that the basic Axis and Allies is already complicated and Global 1940 tops that.

However, I think the NOs favor the Axis too much in Europe. Germany will push the Soviets to Moscow and occupy so many allied-territories that it will drown in IPCs. Russis however wont get any additional income through NOs until Germany has already been pushed out of its territory. I think with your NOs, Germany will snowball pretty hard.

But again, I am not an expert in Global 1940, but that’s my first inpression.

@franklin_cain Russia probably go hard at it. They kinda do for the spread of commiesm anyway. Not that those TTys provide it, there just in the way.

Don’t see anything wrong with it. Allies probably get it more than Axis. They and Russia are at a disadvantage oob anyway

@Valladares said in G40 Historial v1.1:

@SS-GEN These are some preview, new things, that we include in our new version 1.2:

New National Objectives:

UK Europe: Theme “Mediterranean supply line”: 2 I.P.C. if UK Europe controls Malta.

UK Pacific: Theme “Jewel of the far East”: 2 I.P.C. if UK Pacific controls all: India, West India and Cylon.

Japan: Theme “USSR Oil trade”: 2 I.P.C. if Japan is not at war with Soviet Union.

ANZAC: Theme “Anzac new day”: 5 I.P.C. If Anzac have at last one land unit in Egypt, Alexandria or Crete

China: Theme: “Asian Sherman”: China can purchase tanks if at last one USA land unit is in china controlled territory. Historical context: http://www.theshermantank.com/tag/china/
https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/china/m4a2-sherman-in-chinese-service/

Modes of play

Historical and Victory Conditions: With year historical restrictions and game max duration is 12 rounds, and axis or allies have 3 of 4 victory conditions, at the end of the round 12.

Majority of victory cities in Europe.
Majority of victory cities in Pacific.
Majority of oil world producing areas.
Majority of global team I. P. C. (Map and bonuses)

Axis & Allies Global 1940 Historical MOD 6° Play Test
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

Med supply. Malta. I like if any axis ship between Malta and Gib blocks this

Anzac had guys in Egypt.

China building tanks based on a US tank or 2 in China at end of war should be a no go.
Keep in mind this game your playing isn’t a lot like mine. Just feel NOs should have some type of resources on them to get. IMO
Just me. Not knocking your ideas. Try them first. You guys may like them

My concern was not related to turn 1 or 2 but to later German turn:
9 additional Art for a Russian counterattack may cause a problem for Germany advancing to Belarus or Western Ukraine or one turn later to Bryansk, because Italy cannot take this area first (RU takes it back before the German turn) and therefore G cannot land their air on top of it’s army.
12 additional Inf may delay a G 6 attack on Russia (Simon33 was faster while I typed this post).

My concern was based on a game otherwise played without bid or only with a small bid (for example: balanced mod;  our group with other houesrules).
If you play OOB-rules with a bid around 30 IPC, then Gargantua’s idea is very fine (I already understood that he only wants to make one simple adjustment), the inherent bid goes to Russia and does not destroy the game in the MED (as usual IMO).
I will have to try it to see more effects.

Thanks I will check it out.

I finally found a different HR intended to fix Subs vs planes:
@deslock:

IMO, subs are too weak if they can’t be used as defending fodder (I know some other user agree as I read posts complaining about this).  To illustrate, suppose USA approaches Japan with an invasion force and Japan strikes first:

Japan (attacker):
8 ftr
2 bmb

USA (defender):
2 CV
4 ftr
8 sub
2 dd
4 trn

The rules are fairly clear that in this battle the USA can’t choose to take subs as losses, which means Japan has a ~90% chance of victory (killing everything except for the subs).  I’m contemplating a house rule that states:

Defending subs can be hit by any air/sea units regardless of whether or not an attacking DD is present.  However, if no enemy DD is present, the subs may submerge before any rolling.  If subs attack and no defending DD is present, then defending air units can’t hit subs (even when they’re on the surface).

(I believe that the last two sentences are how it already works, but I included them with the house rule for clarity)

This way subs’ current capabilities are preserved, but they can now be used as defending fodder. Does that seem reasonable to the more experienced players here or does it throw off the game mechanics? (I’ve only played AA50 a couple times)

And there is also this thread about how to limit the DDs vs Subs ratio (same problem):
http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=6367

Another way to get a distinctive taste between Fg and TcB on offence is to give attacking Fg a preemptive strike @1, like it is in 1942.2 SBR.

Fg A1 preemptive / D2 regular
TcB A1 / D1
StB A1 /D0, but A1 is like a  1 AAA @1 vs up to 1 plane without preemptive, up to 1 StB or plane whichever is less.

So you kept a progressive scale from D0, to D2.
And every unit get a chance in dogfight phase, no bystander, except for StB on defense.