1942 SE Adding Italy and China

@GGleize ok but adding 12 ipc to allies especially Russia isn’t the same as just moving a German bomber. Germans can use a bomber admittedly, but a Russian bomber is alot more needed than saving the German bomber imo. Minimally, you need to move both German UKR planes away .

@baron-Münchhausen Well its to make the things Germany needs to do well-- without a disaster to have a good game. The margins are tight in sz 7, also to avoid piling on decisively in Egypt.

Regarding Sealion G2: Some guy says buy 2 CA and 2 AP and have the Medd BB attack the UK CA with 1 AP landing 1 Inf in Gibraltar. Landing 3-4 Tanks, 3-4 Men, 5 planes, and 3 CS SBs VS> UK builds of 7 inf, 1 fighter plus landing US bomber and all UK planes and 1 UK tank… I will try it 3 times in practice games, but i doubt it.

Hi @cloud7707 you could try adding an AA Gun to china instead. I know Oztea did it for his Global mods and i thought it worked well fwiw :)

This is a great alternative set up for 1942 anniversary game .  Love the turn order and how the Americans right off the bat get action in the pacific theatre.  I have played this set up twice and have seen the axis and allies both win a game.  I can vouch for this scenario as I had a blast playing it.  If you want more pieces and naval action quickly in the pacific then give this one a try.

Hi, Taamvan.  thanks for the comments.

Sorry, the values are all 4 IPCs for National Objectives.  The NOs came from Argothair, but with some tweaks by our group (I think originally came from a different A&A version).  More money on the board makes the game a little more fun, but in theory it should last longer (which is not desirable), but I feel like we get to the climactic battles faster than we would with minuses…

I do feel like the board is still tilted for the Axis, but Russia having an extra 8 IPCs per turn is a bigger impact than Germany having an extra 8 IPCs.  We maybe could nerf the values down for the Axis, maybe.  I feel like the paratroop rules and the Russian fighter conversion support the Allies.  We’re trying to steady the board without tilting it to the Allies; and meanwhile trying to make some other strategies playable.

TUV counting, making sure the allies start with a clear numbers, tuv, and income advantage to compensate for the drastic positional advantage. Axis quickly catch up in income and the ICs shift to the axis within the first 3 rounds.

More importantly the axis now have to make decisions instead of having one best move to do.

Even more importantly the allies have something to look forward to potentially within the first 3 rounds which typically saw a whole lot of nothing, which is a big reason people do not play this map.

Still favors the axis to win. I like to play the axis so I am a little biased, I just hate to see the game won before it even begun.

I was wrong about the Japanese fleet placement – they do start with a transport and destroyer off the coast of China already, so I don’t feel the need to add more boats there. Instead I would say put the extra DD and transport in the Caroline Islands, where they will be nicely placed to help facilitate earlier attacks on Hawaii, Australia, or Alaska.

Thank you Clyde85, thank you Rhey.

I agree with everything you said. Additionally, the prospect of the Chinese was very interesting. But even so, I would like to see the Chinese army more numerous, leading Japan to put more tanks, more planes and more artillery on Chinese soil IF wanted to continue with the war in Asia.

Japan has many NOs outside China and receive many IPCs and could maintain a war of attrition on Chinese soil as it gets the Co-Prosperity Sphere had in mind (as it was historically) and after that, return to finish the 'China incident ".

I have my own house rules for this situation. They are great!