Why is surrender not an option in the original game?

@thedesertfox

Yeah, I’ve read that and I believe it. I think until 1943 or 1944 the Americans had more ground units in the Pacific?

Yeah, the US built a ton of ships. For some reason the US never gets to seemingly similar numbers in the game.

Very nice idea with the telegrams and stuff.

While reading the german ones, I’ve seen some grammar/wording errors in the german NO cards. Don’t know if someone mind them, but some corrections:

Geheimdienstbericht von der vom Chef Leiter der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD
(even though the german intelligence was called “Abwehr” I think)

Schnellbrief Telegramm

An der den Obersten Befehlshaber der deutschen Truppen

Betrifft: Betreff:

This looks like a lot of work  :lol:

When we play A&A G40 at my bunker it’s always with 6 players, and we play a fast game due to our unique turn system that has worked quite well for us.

Here’s how it works…

In a 6 player game…

1. Simultaneously the German player begins their purchase new units phase, the Russian player moves their eastern forces (18 infantry and 2 AA guns), and the Japanese player begins their purchase new units phase.

2. Simultaneously the German player ends their collect income phase, the Russian player begins their purchase new units phase, and the Japanese player begins their resolve combat phase and/or non combat movement phase.

3. Simultaneously the Russian player ends their collect income phase, the Japanese player ends their collect income phase, and the American player begins their purchase new units phase.

4. Simultaneously the American player ends their collect income phase, the Chinese player begins their purchase new units phase, and the British player (Europe) begins their purchase new units phase.

5. Simultaneously the Chinese player ends their collect income phase, the British player (Pacific) begins their purchase new units phase, and the ANZAC player moves their forces in Africa (2 infantry).

6. Simultaneously the British player (Europe & Pacific) end their collect income phase, the Italian player begins their purchase new units phase, and the ANZAC player begins their purchase new units phase.

7. Simultaneously the Italian player ends their collect income phase, the ANZAC player ends their collect income phase, and the French player conducts their entire turn.

8. Repeat…

PS: We have found that Japan is the real clock pig of all the nations. The player playing Japan should always be starting their purchase new units phase when Germany does, and they should always be ending their collect income phase when Russia does (or shortly after). This one little trick will save you at least 3 hours every game.

boy do u feel dumb :oops:

@zanetheinsane:

@knp7765:

Now I had all those infantry, artillery and tanks stuck in Morocco with no way to get anywhere important.

That’s why I always land in Gibraltar. It’s rare that something horrible happens, but when it does… Spain is always an option. Get with the UK player who can hopefully take on Turkey. Not the prettiest course of action, but sometimes you have to make hard decisions, and getting an Allied foothold in Spain isn’t the worst you can do.

Hmmm…interesting choice. Early on in playing Global, we had 3 different games where the Axis attacked strict neutrals. In fact, we even adopted a house rule using Neutral Blocks so only certain strict neutrals would be affected – Europe, S America, Africa, Middle-East, Mongolia. So if say Sweeden was taken by Germany, Spain, Switzerland and Portugal would go Pro-Allied but Argentina would still be strict neutral. I know some people put Turkey in the Europe block, but we decided to put it in the Middle East block.
We have NEVER had the Allies attack a strict neutral. For one thing, they are usually too busy fighting the Axis to expend resources fighting a neutral. Plus they don’t want to give the Axis any free infantry and territories by turning the other stricts into Pro-Axis, even if it’s just in that block. Also, I guess we just kind of have the mindset that the Allies are the good guys and having them violate a country’s neutrality just doesn’t feel right.
In most of our games, we have played with the strict neutrals basically off limits, both by the Axis and the Allies. Perhaps we should re-think our strategies and start involving the neutrals more in our games.

@Tendron:

Hey everyone, we are in a middle of a game and we would like to know if a transport can move through an island (that has an airport for scramble) to drop troops on another territory. Or can the defender use the scramble ability to stop the transports from doing so?

IE : Say german has transports and wants to send them to Moroco. But those transports need to pass by UK that has an airport (with the new Alpha rules, the fighter can come out to fight). However, Germany has not intention of attacking UK, it wants to attack Moroco. But can such a move be done when opponent has an airport that can scramble on your way? Or does scramble can only be used to defend the seazone when attacked?

ty

Scrambling cannot stop combat movement and is only used to defend a seazone from attack (or against amphibious assault, by instigating combat in that seazone).

Keep on Channel Dashin’.

To add…  The airbase in Gibralter (if in Allied hands) can absolutely defend the seazone from an Axis amphib assault on Morocco.

@Daedelus:

It means you can win the Game without having to capture any Russian Cities.

Well, yeah, theoretically.  Just seems like, particularly with new rules bringing in the U.S. if Axis is in Canadia, that’s not a very realistic proposition.  South Africa seems like it would make for more viable strategery options.

I mean, I haven’t ever put a lot of thought into an Ottawa strategy, mostly because, just looking at it, it seems pretty well doomed to fail.  Might as well try to grab New York.

yes it comes with global rules.

Field marshal Games is taking preorders for Europe.
http://www.fieldmarshalgames.com/axis-allies-europe-1940.html