I'm tinkering around with a new German opener - ignoring SZ 110

@HGC

I see, however you are correct. The “Sea Units Starting in Enemy-Occupied Sea Zones” - rules add to the regular Combat Move rules - they don’t suspend them.

z119 is the correct location of scapa flow in the game because of range issues for german planes

@WARRIOR888:

Did any other scuplts change in the Pacific 1940 Second Edition besides the ones mentioned already?Â

I finished inspecting the new Global sculpts last weekend and here are the main differences I was able to spot between old and new versions of sculpts which are supposed to represent the same model of equipment.  I took a few pictures (see below) to go with these notes.  (I haven’t noted cases in which some of the details on the sculpts are simply defined a little better in one version than in another, without being different in actual shape.)  Most of the differences involve sculpts which were introduced in 1942 (2nd ed) game, and which were then replaced by revised sculpts in the Global 1940 (2nd ed) game.

Artillery: 105mm LeFH 18 howitzer (German)

Introduced in 1942 (2nd ed), in which the breech and the undercarriage are connected.  In the 1940 (2nd ed) version, there is a gap between them.

Antiaircraft Gun: 3.7in QFAA (British)

Introduced in 1942 (2nd ed). In the 1940 (2nd ed) version, there is an additional structure underneath the thick lower part of the barrel assembly, at the point where it connects to the mounting.

Antiaircraft Gun: M1939 85mm (Russian)

Introduced in 1942 (2nd ed), in which the gun ends with a flared muzzle brake.  In the 1940 (2nd ed) version, the barrel is more slender and ends with grooves running around the barrel tip.

Antiaircraft Gun: 88mm FLAK 41 (German)

Introduced in 1942 (2nd ed), in which a spur extends backward from the base of the breech, the horizontal element projecting forward from the front of the mounting is cylindrical, and two of the mounting’s legs are thicker than the other two.  In the 1940 (2nd ed) version, the breech is shorter, the horizontal element projecting forward from the front of the mounting is oval, and the mounting’s four legs are the same thickness.

Antiaircraft Gun: 75mm Type 88 (Japanese)

Introduced in 1942 (2nd ed), in which the mounting’s four legs are thicker than in the 1940 (2nd ed) version.

Cruiser: Kent class (British)

Introduced in Anniversary.  In the 1940 (2nd ed) version, the third funnel is short instead of being the same height at the other two.

Sculpt Differences 1.jpg
Sculpt Differences 2.jpg

Thanks everyone for the advice.

Unfortunately my friends don’t come over enough, so I end up just testing out different strategies. Right now I am trying really hard as Germany to bomb the living heck out of Britain. And it’s working: at the end of G2, ALL British facilities on the island (except for airbase Scotland) were gone. The whole Royal Navy was gone as well (but so was the Kriegsmarine). I figure with the bombing and the subs I’m throwing at Britain it’s almost better to just bomb them. Because I think I could even when the US came into the war. Russia is going to die, and I think Germany is going to do really well.

As for Italy, they’re in major trouble with Africa. On UKE1 I tried out taking Tobruk. I succeeded (albeit at the cost of not having my Med. AF available to pound the Italian Navy), which has thrown Italy on its heels. Also, I landed 1 loaded trans. from GB (with 2 inf.) and if it survived the U-boats G2, it would’ve grabbed Brazil.

Japan is probably going to crush India/China, but since Russia is under so much pressure to retreat they’ll probably leave each other alone and not trigger the Mongol infantry.

in some cases, there aren’t those “extra” destroyers to spare… Like going from a naval base you build in Hainan, to Calcutta…

@Darby:

Ran into the question

Thought about reducing Bombers vs Naval Units
( I thought hitting on a one was good )
but should they still cost 12?

It did not seem right …but selling them for Tac Bomber or fighter cost seemed wierd
So rather then reducing price I thought about augmenting something else.

Came up with:

Cost: 14
Attack: 4 / 1 vs Naval units
Defense: 1
Range: 6
Takes 1 hit to reduce attack by 2 / and cannot proceed with an SBR
Takes 2 hits to destroy

The whole idea of limiting bombers to a one against ships at sea is to be a little more realistic. With bombers leaving an air base they have seven moves. With the limited number of sea zones on AA maps the bombers destroying fleets in the middle of the ocean just does not work. My thinking is the OOB rules for bombers attacking everything on the map at a four are broken. Just tweaking the rules a little makes the game a little better and no change in the cost is needed. The bomber is still a valuable asset at twelve IPCs.

@strategic:

I agree. I do not use Alpha in any way, shape, or fashion, although I also sometimes do a bid and I make Italy neutral until its 1st turn, otherwise, I don’t do anything else. Thank you IL for coming up with the Italy neutral idea.

Dude, Italy being neutral on the first round is an awesome idea.  Italy officially didn’t enter the war until June 10, 1940.  If we consider the invasion of Paris occurring on June 5 by the German forces, and all the turns are effectively happening simutaneously, then Italy has the OPTION to declare war on its turn, starting the game neutral to the Allies.  Brilliant.

(Though 5 days is a bit of a stretch considering each turn in game represents 3 months…)

thanks!  :-D