[Global 1940] 2nd Revised Setup For France

@crockett36
This seems interesting. I’ll try it out.

@Imperious-Leader sorry, no pics this time but the table did feel like this was a way better way to begin the game. Gets the game going a little quicker and with zero 9-12 anxiety for either side. Seems like it would be more fair for tournament play also.

@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 : )

These rules are part of the Axis & Allies Global 1940 2E, House Rules Expansion.

Some basic units from the OOB G40 rulebook have seen a cost reduction. This is due to the multiple new units & rules that are included in Axis & Allies Global 1940 2E, House Rules Expansion rulebook.

6. G40 Cost of all units, page 1.pdf
6. G40 Cost of all units, page 2.pdf

@Pitt79 please elaborate the usa russia scenario thanx

I would use these rules:

(1) if the defender sees a key battle coming and can predict that they’ll want an unusual order of loss, they can leave a note, send an e-mail, etc., informing the attacker of their preferred order of loss, and the attacker will then follow that order.

(2) if there is no note, the attacker will provisionally use a standard order of loss.

(3) after seeing the results of the battle, the defender can pay 2 IPCs to the bank per casualty that they want to switch. You didn’t want to lose your bomber after all? Fine, pay 2 IPCs, and you can have your bomber back in exchange for one of your infantry. This should be expensive enough to deter casual abuse but still cheap enough that if you would really be upset about the order of loss, you can fix it without too much drama. Don’t think it’s fair that you should have to pay to set up your order of loss exactly the way you want it? Well, then, you should have foreseen the battle and given orders in advance. Don’t feel like thinking that hard every turn? Well, then, you can always just cough up 2 IPCs. It’s a way of speeding up the game while making sure that nothing unacceptably bad will happen because of order of loss issues.

@hengst not wasted at all. Repetition is what fine tunes these scenarios to make them the best they can be. Keep up the good work

I’d like to know if anyone has developed an alternate setup for either AAR or AA50.  I am not looking for historical accuracy - I’m looking for a setup that produces the most exciting gameplay.
I know a lot of people would disagree with me, but I like A&A not because it’s based on WW2, but because of the gameplay and mechanics. 
So, I’m looking for a setup that would enhance gameplay.  I can’t help but think that some “exciting” setup options are sitting on the cutting-room floor simply because they are not historically accurate.
Can anyone help?
Thanks.