Variable set-up

We have been playing CDG’s 1939 v3 set-up with a neutrals variant and it is great.  Is anyone aware of a pre-1939 alternate set-up worth trying?

Thanks…MF

divide attack and defence values by 2.
Converts from D12 to D6 or half.
There is more variety available for the 12 sided dice.
3 is 1.5 on a D6 so you may need to fudge the numbers a bit
Build cost in 1940 is all at once so 5/5/5/5= 20IPC rather than 4 turns each @$5

In case they dont add the 1940 rules at the end. Not all have this included anymore.

@Young:

@CWO:

I think Michelangelo (or some other famous artist) once said, “No work of art is ever finished – only abandoned.”

If I conceive a child, and than a second child a year later… did I abandon my first born?

8-)

If your first child is an art of work, then yes ……

So this is what I tried in place of bids.
Each power,in the same order as play so Germany 1st France last,gets to relocate 1 starting unit (with the exception of ICs and capital ships)to a place only where they already have another starting unit.
  For example:Russia can start a tank in amur instead of moscow.
                    Germany starts  cruiser in sz113.
                  Italy moves dd from sz96 to 97
                    Us puts a 2nd fig in Phillipines
I think its gives allies a better chance b/c they start with more units out of position and they would ,for the most part, make their choices after axis.

The main advantage for overall game balance in AA50 1942 (Allies v Axis) under these rules (with the non-com opening), is that the US gets to keep their Pacific carrier deck. This is fairly major in encouraging the dual theater war, and is one of the things we like most about the set up. The bonus structure also encourages a more effective Russian tank purchase under most set ups, which leads to a dramatic Kursk style scenerio on the eastern front under most openings. Japan alternatively has a much greater incentive to build air and naval, because the Allied position on the sea is stronger, requiring a more substantial counter.

Also, and this is just an aside, but having played quite a few alternative starts now, it has become much clearer to me why the gameplay on this mapboard is so centered around Moscow and Europe. It is a consequence of the basic map territory connections. 7 territories border Moscow which mean 7 ways in, a split 7 defense of the capital. Berlin is 5 territories and a sea zone, 6 ways in, 6 split defense. UK is 5 all from the sea. Compared to Eastern USA and Japan which can both be defended from a single sea zone, it is fairly clear to me why the board would favor KGF, regardless of the unit set up, or the starting income conditions. And why Moscow is the clear choice over London, for a conservative Axis warplan.

Still, that said, I do find that the bonus scheme outlined above helps to moderate the built-into-the-board drivers on Moscow and Berlin (and to a lesser extent London), and pushes it instead into a somewhat more “world” wide conflict. Plus the idea of a board which features 6 possible starts rather than just 1 seems to me a worthwhile thing to pursue. At least 6 times the replay, but much more in actuality, since the bonuses allow for so many potentially different purchasing strats.

Ok we played this today and it turned out to be pretty balanced.

Allies won

I’m still a little iffy about the 2 German subs that start SZ 2 (Germany subs were in total control of the Atlantic for the entire game)

The other rule changes I made was to make Borneo and East Indies (DEI) basically neutral until attacked by Axis or US enters the war, then they join FEC/UK seemed to work out nicely.

I guess ill get to work on a 1941 and 1940 setup for the 1942 2nd edition……

Thanks!