Best posts made by Argothair

@cornwallis Samoa is a clever place to build a naval base; I did not see that it connects to both New York and Queensland. That’s really interesting that you are able to redirect forces that quickly. For me, though, the question is whether the tactical surprise is really worth the investment. On the one hand you’ve got the $15 for the naval base in Samoa, which is expensive. On the other hand, by committing to travel through Samoa, you take pressure off of many of the potential Japanese targets.

As you move boats from San Francisco to Hawaii to Queensland, you are incidentally threatening Tokyo, Korea, Iwo Jima, Wake, Midway, and the Caroline Islands.

As you move boats from New York to Samoa to Queensland, you do not threaten any of those targets – so unless you want to slow down your attack on Japanese hot spots by a full turn, you are kind of broadcasting to Japan exactly where you are going to attack.

Meanwhile, unless Japan panics and commits an unforced error, it’s usually not that hard for Japan to reorient from a land-based strategy to a naval strategy. They start with a massive air force that can be used on land in China, Burma, Siberia, etc., and then that same air force can be flown away and placed on newly built carriers to defend the Pacific islands. Even in a worst-case scenario, where Japan built 3 minor factories on the mainland, they can still pivot to building something like like 3 carriers, 1 destroyer, 5 infantry, and 1 artillery for $75. The carriers accommodate the existing Japanese air force, and the infantry/artillery continue the fight in mainland Asia. The US has to build its own planes, and defender has the advantage anyway, so matching that defending Japanese force would require something like 3 carriers, 2 subs, 3 fighters, 3 tacs for $123. Throw in a couple of loaded transports for $30 so that you can actually retake some of the money islands, and the total bill is $153…basically two full turns of American income just to match one turn of Japanese spending, even when Japan is caught totally by surprise.

Similarly, the European Axis might think that they have to do a lot of defense against an incoming American invasion of Italy or whatever, but as long as they planned that defense intelligently, without panicking, they can still take Moscow on schedule. Right, like so you have a couple extra Italian infantry in Rome instead of a tank, or you have a couple of German subs in the Baltic and it turns out you don’t need them because the whole Allied fleet sailed through the Panama Canal. OK, no big deal. The infantry in Italy can eventually go by transport to Morocco or Syria or wherever they can be useful for harassing the British; the extra subs can go to the Irish Sea for convoy damage. Meanwhile, hopefully the Germans mostly did their defense by buying air power, which can both threaten to shoot down Allied ships, or, if those ships never show up, can fly to the eastern front and support an attack on Moscow.

So while I do like the Samoa naval base for the sheer amusement value and for the chance to break a psychologically weak opponent, I think it’s probably not a valid element of top-tier competitive play. I’m stumped to see how you could recover enough value from the naval base to justify the cost.

One idea I have been playing around with recently is a naval base in Wake Island. It probably only works in Balanced Mod or Path to Victory, because without the extra national objectives for the smaller islands the extra range just isn’t very important, but it’s always bothered me that ships are only moving 2 spaces from San Francisco to Hawaii – it seems inefficient. If you move them 3 spaces from San Francisco to Wake, then another 3 spaces can threaten the widest possible range of Japanese targets, as well as making it harder for Japan to protect Tokyo by interposing a single blocking destroyer.

@mainah That’s a fair observation. I would say that this is part of why you mostly have to stick to the fundamentals as the Allies – a sufficiently weird buy, especially as America, is going to tip off an alert Axis player far enough in advance that they can build the appropriate defenses and counter your attack. Thus, for the most part, it’s best to build units for the attacks that work well even when your opponent knows they’re coming. If you know that America is coming for you with a mix of destroyers, carriers, fighters, transports, infantry, and artillery, there’s really nothing special you can do to prepare for that; you either leave so many infantry back on the western front that Russia survives, or you yield some ground in the west, or you get wrecked. There’s no ‘magic bullet’ against a well-rounded force like that, so it’s OK that the Axis can see the well-rounded force coming.

One partial exception is territories that let you fork many targets at once – an Allied fleet west of Gibraltar is threatening Norway, West Germany, Normandy, Southern France, Northern Italy, and Southern Italy, and the Axis don’t get any advance warning at all about exactly where that fleet is going to hit. Similarly, an Allied fleet in the Caroline Islands or the Philippines can hit approximately everything the Japanese own, with no advance warning. So I see Allied ‘surprise’ as less about making weird purchases that support weird attacks, and more about threatening so many different normal attacks that your opponent is likely to miscalculate somewhere and leave one of the target areas under-defended.

Karl7 (Axis +0) defeats Argothair (Allies) at BM3 with an effective Sea Lion after American reinforcements charge to Iceland to prepare to liberate London…and then realize they don’t have quite enough to get the job done and go back to Canada. London was finally liberated on round 11, but by then it was too late for the Allies, and Argothair surrendered. Rumors that the Allied High Command was bribed by an offer of a rematch at Axis +6 are merely enemy propaganda and should be entirely discounted.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/33561/g40bml-argothair-allies-vs-karl7/141

Interesting ideas about making the map safe for color-blind players, @Black_Elk. I’ll see about adding in some saturation contrast among the colors inside a faction, so that everyone can tell them apart. And yes, my goal is to keep the mechanics quite simple – I don’t know if you saw my other post about simplified subs, bombers, and interceptors, but I’m trying to minimize the number of exceptions and special rules: the territory values are what you see printed on the map, not what’s on the map plus a national objective. The combat values are what you see printed on the purchasing chart, not what’s on the chart plus special situational bonuses. I’ve got free rein as a designer to at least try to create a map that works out of the box, so hopefully that will help me push toward simplicity.

Along those lines, @SS-GEN, thank you very much for the suggestions, but, yes, my goal is to have japanese tanks blitz just like any other tank, and to have planes move 4 spaces from islands just like they move 4 spaces from any other territory. If I design the map tiles correctly, then adding in extra movement won’t be necessary, because islands will be naturally on the way from somewhere to somewhere else. If I design the Russian economy correctly, then nerfing Japanese units won’t be necessary, because Japan will be naturally checked and balanced by Russian armies.

I plan to put a starting minor factory in the Urals for the 1942 setup that can deadzone Siberia, which acts as a natural chokepoint, and in the 1939 setup (Khalkin Gol!) Russia will have tanks in eastern Siberia that outnumber and outpunch the starting Japanese forces. Note that even Manchuria is 4 spaces from Moscow. Buryatia and Kamchatka will not support a factory, I think, and Vladivostok & Korea are 5 spaces from Moscow. That’s enough room to have an interesting battle – the key will be making sure Russia has the factory locations, dollars, and starting troops to effectively oppose Japan without automatically losing against Germany. I think I can do that. I’ll keep you posted!

@vodot Looks fabulous, well done! This map would be much more fun to play on than the standard Anniversary.

If you’re looking for still yet more improvements, here are some thoughts I’ve had over the last couple of years after reading up on more WW2 history:

• Oil was more important to everyone’s war effort than is really appreciated on the A&A maps. In particular, valuing Trans-Jordan (Basra/Kuwait) and Persia (Bandar Abbas) at only 1 IPC each is a huge underestimate. I would want to bump Trans-Jordan to at least $2 and Persia to at least $3. However, they don’t make good factory sites, because despite the important oil production, they weren’t really industrialized and they weren’t places where it was easy to recruit infantry. So, possibly this is something that needs to be handled through national objectives rather than just adding IPCs on the map.
• Along similar lines, Rumania needs to be worth more than just 2 IPCs for Germany. I would probably just make Poland worth $2 and Rumania worth $3. Rumania is a perfectly reasonable place to build a factory because the Rumanians did send their own armies, tanks, and planes into battle on behalf of the Axis.
• Ukraine and Eastern Ukraine were hugely important to the Russian economy in terms of their industrial and agricultural production. I would probably bump them to $3 and $2.
• The Chinese map is still set up to allow the Japanese to quickly and reliably conquer all of China – there’s just not quite enough defensive depth. Everything except Chinghai is 2 spaces away from Shanghai, and if all you’ve got left is Chinghai then the Chinese have no income. I’m not sure of quite the right solution, but I guess I’d ideally like to see three ‘corners’ for the Chinese to hide and regroup in, each of which requires a separate angle of attack for the Japanese – a northern region that the Russians can easily reinforce, a southern region that the British can easily reinforce, and a western region where the Chinese themselves can generate their own units that won’t be immediately blown up. Part of the answer here might be to get away from the “every Chinese territory is worth $1” setup. E.g. if you add a Chungking region worth $3 in the far southwest, and bump Ningxia to $2 and add a buffer territory to the east of Ningxia? There’s still the question of how to physically get Russian troops into China; right now Ningxia is at least 3 moves away from the nearest Russian factory, yet only 2 moves away from a hypothetical Japanese factory in Manchuria. Somehow that ratio needs to be reversed.

Finally, I’d love to see victory cities in South Africa and Brazil – less because of history and more because it’s nice to have that region of the world acknowledged as part of the game. It takes a long time for the Axis to penetrate that deeply into the Allied south/west, which means that if we’re playing for any reasonable number of turns, there won’t be enough time to build up forces, take those territories, profit from the extra IPCs, turn those IPCs into new units, and use those new units to seize a victory city. Unless we’re literally playing to concession, I probably have to ignore those regions of the map to focus on victory cities, which is less fun. The map is there to be played on; I don’t want to ignore any part of it! :-)

All right, here’s a stab at a short, basic overview of Allied opening strategy. No doubt others will have more detailed or more advanced ideas to share, but hopefully this will be a helpful overview for people who are just starting to get serious about Global 1940. I’ll start with Russia and then add other nations in later posts.

USSR:

Your position at the center of the board, sandwiched between Germany, Italy, and Japan, means that you are usually a prime target for Axis bullying and that you will usually need to build mostly infantry and play a mostly defensive game where you retreat steadily toward Moscow and attempt to hold out in Moscow as long as possible to give the rest of the Allies a chance to win the game on other fronts.

However, usually is not the same thing as always, and being able to correctly identify the exceptions to the rule can be the key to victory. If Germany builds more than four transports or otherwise telegraphs its intention to launch a serious amphibious assault on London, Russia will need to rapidly go on the offense, building tanks in Leningrad and Kiev so as to seize as much German territory as possible as quickly as possible while Germany is busy with the British. Conversely, if Germany loses less than three planes against the British navy, or builds a ton of early land units, or declares war on Russia turn 1, then even retreating to Moscow may not be enough – Russia may be forced to retreat even further, to the Caucasus or Persia, so that German tanks can’t punch through Russia’s southern flank to Egypt or India. Although losing Moscow is very serious, it’s not the end of the game for the Allies; if the Allies hold the line in London, Egypt, Persia, India, Java, New Guinea, Hawaii, and Alaska, then the Allies have a large economic advantage even after losing Moscow and central Russia. Try to keep an eye on when reinforcing Moscow will drain Axis resources and delay further Axis expansion, vs. when you’re just throwing good money after bad.

A key consideration in defending Moscow is whether you will be able to get your armies home in time. Try to anticipate what turn Germany will attack Moscow based on what Germany is building. If Germany is building 10 infantry in Berlin, then the attack is probably still five turns away, because the infantry take a long time to march across eastern Europe. If Germany is building 4 strategic bombers in Berlin, then the attack is probably happening next turn. If you have a stack of, e.g., 10 infantry and 4 artillery in Belarus and you see that you’re able to use it to kill a stack of 4 German tanks in eastern Poland, that’s fine…but only if you can make it back to Moscow from eastern Poland before Moscow gets attacked. Otherwise you’re throwing away 14 Russian defenders to take out 4 German attackers, which is a terrible trade.

When you calculate what can make it back to Moscow in time, keep an eye on Germany’s mobile forces and on Italy’s can openers. A medium-sized Russian army that has enough turns to march back to Moscow still might not arrive safely in Moscow if it can be creamed by 20 German mechs and 10 German tanks and 10 German planes without throwing those forces seriously out of position. It’s easy to get trapped. Along similar lines, if the Italians have more than 2 or 3 units in eastern Europe, you will need to arrive in Moscow in time to guard it against Germany’s fast-moving tanks and mechs, because Germany might be able to capture Moscow even without its slower infantry, and when the Italians are present with a significant force, it can turn out to be so expensive to stop Italian can-openers that you don’t actually gain any ground. To reliably stop a force of, e.g., 2 Italian mechs, 2 Italian tanks, and 1 Italian bomber, you probably need 7 Russian infantry – but if you put 7 Russian infantry on each of the 3 territories in range of the Italians, now you’ve pulled 21 infantry out of your main army, and you can be defeated in detail with unacceptable losses.

One positive opportunity to stay alert for is the chance to permanently take and hold Scandinavia with a medium-sized force. Anything you send into Finland is very unlikely to make it back to Moscow in time for the big battle…but if you take both Norway and Finland, that’s a 21-IPC swing each turn: 5 IPCs of territory denied to Germany, 5 IPCs of territory in your pocket, 6 IPCs for the spread of communism, and 5 IPCs for Germany’s iron ore shortage. It also means that whatever German units you kill in Finland won’t be able to join the attack on Moscow, and it provides a critical landing area for Allied planes that can help them first sink the Baltic German fleet (reducing the number of land units that can arrive in Leningrad to march to Moscow) and then take Denmark to threaten Berlin. The overall effect on German offensive chances can be devastating. You can’t afford to spend the entire Russian army and air force just on taking this one region, but if you can take it on the cheap (18 units or so) then it’s probably worthwhile.

Another favorite trick is to send one Russian mech south to pick up some combination of Tobruk, Libya, Iraq, Italian Somaliland, and Ethiopia. The British wind up doing the heavy lifting to roll back the Italian armies, and then the lone Russian mech scoops up the rewards, getting that sweet, sweet 3-IPC Spread of Communism objective for each territory you take, each turn, until Moscow falls. If the game goes long, picking up any two of these territories can be a tiebreaker in your favor.

Finally, you’ve got your Siberian armies, with 18 infantry and 3 AAA guns. If you stack them all on the border with Japan, they can be wiped out, and then you will lose Siberia pretty rapidly, but this does force Japan to spend a significant amount of resources going north, which is not especially lucrative for Japan, so it’s one way to slow Japan down if you like. This fits well with aggressive “Kill Japan first” openings where most of your resources are going into the Pacific early on. I usually prefer to wait until turn 2 to stack the Russian armies on the Japanese border, because until turn 2 I don’t really know what Japan is planning. A huge Russian army on Japan’s doorstep is a great response to a turn 1 Japanese declaration of war – but if you open with that move, it’s easy enough for Japan to just keep the peace and expand into China and Siberia for a couple of turns. The only time I would bother with a turn 1 deployment to Amur is if Germany totally broadcasts its intention to go for a Sea Lion, e.g., builds 2+ transports on turn 1. Normally, I prefer to retreat the westmost Russian stack toward the west on turn 1. If Germany goes for an aggressive/early attack on Moscow, that way at least one stack can usually still make it to the capital. If Germany is giving Russia more time, the western most stack can pivot south to Kansu to reinforce China (also usually in the nick of time), while the eastern stack can return to Amur and give Japan plenty of headaches.

The ideal Russian opening build is situational – you want mostly tanks in response to a Sea Lion, and mostly infantry in response to a turn 1 declaration of war on Russia – but in general you need a balance of offensive punch, mobility, and sheer unit count. You’ll need either some tanks or some artillery so that you can counter-attack weak German stacks…you may not find any, but if you can’t even credibly threaten to attack lone German planes/tanks, it gives Germany too many options. You’ll need either some mechs or some tanks so that you can shift forces rapidly between theaters; you can’t afford to give away both Leningrad and Kiev too early (giving away one is probably fine), so you need to be able to rapidly reinforce whichever factory you’re planning to defend. Mostly, though, you need units – Germany can bring an alarmingly high number of units to Moscow alarmingly early, and you will lose your minor factories to conquest and/or bombing as the game goes on, so make sure to build a reasonable number of infantry in your extra factories while you still have the production capacity. It’s easier to correct for having built too many infantry than it is to correct for having built too many fighters. Over the course of two turns (roughly 80 IPCs) I might build 1 tac, 1 tank, 2 mechs, 4 artillery, and 13 infantry. Your mileage will and should vary!

I recently got back from a Global 1940 tournament in Orange County hosted by SiredBlood, where we got to play three games each with SiredBlood’s fascinating house rules. SiredBlood has a full set of cards and videos that will walk you through his new rules step-by-step, but they can take a long time to read and/or watch, especially if you’re already familiar with the rules for OOB Global 1940 play. So, to help spread awareness of these fun new rules, I am writing up what I see as his key additions to the OOB ruleset. Note that all of these rules were invented by SiredBlood, and he has not asked or authorized me to write this post – I’m just writing this up as an unofficial fan. I don’t claim that this is a 100% complete list of his rules, only that it’s enough to get you up and running to try out his ideas.

STRATEGIC BOMBERS

Strategic bombers can only roll dice or be claimed as casualties on the first round of combat. After the first round of combat, if your strategic bombers survive, set them off to the side as if they had retreated. Note that this means that strategic bombers no longer auto-kill undefended transports. Instead, you roll one die per bomber, and kill one transport per roll of 4 or less.

Each strategic bomber may be used to deliver up to 2 infantry as paratroopers, even without any technology. Both the strategic bombers and the infantry must begin their movement in the same territory. If delivering paratroopers during the combat move, you must invade the same territory with at least 1 land unit for each infantry you want to deliver as a paratrooper. For example, if you are attacking Egypt with 3 tanks and 1 fighter, you could deliver up to 3 infantry as paratroopers to join in the attack. Bombers do not roll any combat dice during turns when they are delivering paratroopers. Bombers on delivery runs trigger AAA rolls and may be chosen as AAA casualties, and if they are hit by AAA, then their cargo is also automatically killed.

Any strategic bomber that did not participate in combat may deliver paratroopers during your non-combat move. Both the strategic bombers and the infantry must begin their movement in the same territory. The destination territory must already have at least 1 land unit from your faction (Axis or Allied) per infantry that you want to deliver during non-combat. When delivering troops during non-combat, your bomber may land in the destination territory (if you owned it at the start of your turn) or may continue flying using any remaining fuel.

CRUISERS

Cruisers now defend at 4 instead of 3 when paired 1:1 with friendly battleships.

NAVAL BLOCKADES

It is no longer possible to blockade an entire enemy fleet with only 1 destroyer. Instead, each defending surface warship can block the movement of up to 3 enemy warships. When attempting to pass through a blockade, you must leave at least three warships behind in the blockaded sea zone for each blockading surface vessel. As the attacker, you cannot include submarines in your screening force unless the defending blockade includes at least one destroyer. (If the blockading force includes no destroyers, then your submarines can slip through the blockade anyway.) You may declare attacks and amphibious assaults on the far side of the blockade, but none of these attacks occur unless and until your screening force defeats and wipes out the blockading force. (This is similar to how an amphibious assault will not occur if you fail to win the naval battle in the sea zone immediately outside the coastline you are invading.)

In order to send transports past the blockade, you must have at least one surface warship remaining to escort the transport. For example, to get a transport past one blockading enemy cruiser, you would need 4 surface warships – 3 to screen the cruiser, and 1 to escort the transport.

RAILROADS

All industrial complexes generate a “rail allowance” that enhances your non-combat movements. Any land unit may move by rail. Units moving by rail may move up to 3 spaces, but may only move through/into territories that you have owned since the start of your turn. The unit moving by rail must have started its turn in the territory with a factory. Each factory can provide a railway for a number of units equal to the territory value of the territory where the factory sits. For example, a factory in Novgorod (value = 2 IPCs) could move up to 2 land units each turn up to 3 spaces each.

RETREATING RUSSIAN FACTORIES

Any Russian-controlled minor industrial complexes may make a non-combat move of 1 space to an original Russian territory that is currently in Russian control and that is worth at least 1 IPC. A complex that moves has its production capacity lowered by 1 unit on the turn that it moves. For example, if you retreat your factory from Novgorod to Archangel, it would only be able to produce two units that turn (not the usual three units). For each factory that you move, you lose 1 IPC from that turn’s collect income phase, as if you had been convoyed by a submarine. In addition, a factory that moves loses its entire rail allowance for that turn (the railroad is assumed to be busy moving heavy machinery and engineers).
CHINESE CAVALRY

China starts with a bid of 3 cavalry units, which attack at 2, defend at 1, move up to 2 spaces, cost 4 IPCs, and blitz like tanks. In addition, China may buy more cavalry units at any time, even if the Burma road is closed. In addition, if the Burma Road is open, China may buy up to 2 tanks over the course of the game for 6 IPCs each. The neutral Mongolian units that would normally be infantry are instead replaced by neutral cavalry.

UNIFIED BRITISH ECONOMY

The UK Europe and UK Pacific economies are unified and treated as a single integrated economy. The British player may not spend more than 20 IPCs per turn on the Pacific side of the map. If India is conquered, the conqueror loots up to 10 IPCs from the British economy, regardless of how many territories Britain owns on the Pacific side of the board. If London is conquered, the conqueror loots up to 20 IPCs from the British economy, regardless of how many territories Britain owns on the Europe side of the board. In addition, if London is conquered, the British economy is fractured into a Canadian economy and an Indian (UK Pacific) economy. The Canadian treasury starts at 7 IPCs and starts with control of units located in or off the coast of Canada. Canada does not start with control of formerly British territories in Scotland, Africa or the Middle East, and may not build new factories outside of Canada. Canada may capture and then use enemy-held factories in Europe, Africa, or the Middle East.

ITALIAN LIBERATION CORPS

If the Allies ever conquer Rome, Italy immediately switches its loyalty to the Allied faction, and becomes controlled by the Allied player for the rest of the game, even if the Axis later re-occupy Rome. However, at the moment that the Allies conquer Rome, any and all Italian territories that are occupied by at least 1 German land unit are immediately converted to German control. In addition, any Italian land units that are stacked up with at least 1 German land unit are immediately converted to their German equivalents. For example, suppose Northern Italy has 2 German tanks and 6 Italian infantry, and Yugoslavia has 1 German fighter and 3 Italian tanks. If the Allies conquer Rome, Northern Italy would become a German territory with 2 German tanks and 6 German infantry, whereas Yugoslavia would remain an Italian territory and would contain 3 Italian (Allied) tanks. The German fighter would be forced to retreat to the nearest German-controlled territory.

ADDITIONAL NATIONAL OBJECTIVES

Germany: 5 IPCs for having at least 5 submarines on the map during your collect income phase (after deploying reinforcements)
Russia: 3 IPCs for owning all of Ukraine, Urals, and Siberia.
Japan: 3 IPCs for owning each otherwise 0 IPC US or UK Pacific island (e.g. Guam, Midway, Fiji, etc.)
Japan: 5 IPCs for owning Burma
Japan: 10 IPCs for owning all of China
Italy: 1 IPC each for owning any of Ethiopia, British Somaliland, Italian Somaliland, Sudan, and Kenya

TECHNOLOGIES

Any country may research one technology at a time by making one payment during its “purchase reinforcements” phase. Germany, Russia, Japan, Britain, and the USA start with “Phase 1” progress toward a technology of their choice. All other countries start at Phase 0.

To advance from Phase 0 to Phase 1 costs 4 IPCs.
To advance from Phase 1 to Phase 2 costs 4 IPCs.
To advance from Phase 2 to Phase 3 costs 4 IPCs.

To advance from Phase 3 to Phase 4, you must roll one six-sided die, and pay the number of IPCs shown. For example, if you roll a 3, you would pay 3 IPCs. If you roll a 6, after you pay 6 IPCs, you immediately discover the technology.

Once you are at Phase 4, you may buy any number of six-sided dice for 1 IPC each. Roll all of the dice together. If any of the dice show a 5 or a 6, you immediately discover the technology. If none of the dice show a 5 or a 6, those dice are wasted, you remain at Phase 4, and you may purchase more dice on your next turn to try again.

You secretly choose which technology to research when you reach Phase 1. You do not have to reveal which technology you have acquired until the first time you use the technology. For example, if you develop Long-Range Aircraft, you can continue to move your fighters 4 spaces per turn and keep your technology a secret. This can help you maintain the element of surprise.

Once you have discovered a technology, you may immediately begin researching Phase 1 of a second technology, but this is rarely a worthwhile investment.

VICTORY CONDITIONS

The game ends at the end of France’s eighth turn. At that point, check to see if the Axis currently hold at least 12 out of the 26 available victory points (VPs). If so, the Axis win. If not, the Allies win. It does not matter who controls which victory points until the end of the game – all that counts is who controls the victory points at the end of turn 8.

(1-8) Berlin, Rome, Paris, Warsaw, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Manila (1 VP each)
(9-16) Calcutta, Sydney, Honolulu, London, Cairo, Leningrad, Moscow, Stalingrad (1 VP each)
(17) Control all of Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, Italian Somaliland, British Somaliland (1 VP total)
(18) Control all of Persia, Northwest Persia, Iraq, Caucasus (1 VP total)
(19) Control all of Java, Sumatra, Celebes, Dutch New Guinea (1 VP total)
(20) Control all of Ukraine, Urals, Siberia (1 VP total)
(21) Control all of North Africa (Morocco through Egypt) plus Crete and Greece (1 VP total)
(22) Control all of China (1 VP total)
(23) Control all of Burma, Shan State, Siam, Malaya, and French Indochina (1 VP total)
(24) Control at least 4 Pacific islands, including Hawaii and Borneo but not Ceylon, originally owned by UK or US (1 VP total)
(25) Allies do not control Sicily, Sardinia, Cyprus, Crete, or Malta (1 VP total)
(26) Axis have at least 4 land units in each of Normandy, Holland, Denmark, and Norway (1 VP total)

@SS-GEN Yup, I’m just really busy. I’ll come back eventually!

@vodot Sure, that all makes sense to me. There’s no in-game reason to separate the wheat and oil resources if they’re both just +1 IPC, unless you happen to have all the different resource tokens lying around and you’re looking for an excuse to play with your toys…not that there’s anything wrong with that. :)

I favor the preemptive raising of 1 chinese infantry that stops blitzes – tanks have no business blitzing through the dirt trails over the forested mountains of central China in any case. And it helps to suggest the omnipresence of chinese irregulars and partisans and half-trained regiments that were constantly rising up to resist Japanese occupation. Possibly some rejiggering of the territory borders would still be useful in addition to the guerillas; I’ll chew on it.

I think the answer to the VC issue is just to say that there’s a new threshold for Axis/Allies to win the game, and the number is not necessarily the same number. No reason you couldn’t require, e.g., 16 VP for Allied win and 12 VP for Axis win (or whatever the correct numbers turn out to be after you’ve chosen your victory cities).

@Guam-Solo Good question, Guam Solo. In most games, the USA can push for one objective on each side of the map, but not literally at the same time – the push for one objective should start two or three turns earlier than the push for the second objective. The reasoning here is that during the first stage of your campaign, you will need transports and men and warships and some air support in order to safely occupy a sea zone and then gain control of your targeted land territories. This is very expensive and consumes 85%+ of the US’s resources. At best, your remaining resources can be used to garrison a region that is already Allied-controlled (e.g., stack Honolulu with infantry, or stack Gibraltar with fighters). However, during the second stage of your campaign, when you have already achieved regional naval supremacy, you generally do not need to build new warships, and you may even be able to recycle some of your transports by sending them on a loop back and forth between safe sea zones. You can re-fill four transports much, much more cheaply than you can build four new transports, fill those transports, build an escorting navy, and build an escorting air force – and the resulting savings can be used to open a new offensive campaign.

The exception to this rule is when all of the Axis powers press inward toward Moscow, without paying serious attention to contesting the USA’s attacks. If Germany sends its entire air force east and builds nothing but mechs and tanks while Japan sends its entire air force west while building nothing but minor factories, then you can probably get away with an all-out simultaneous two-front war, because your landing parties just won’t be facing much opposition, so you won’t need to build as many escort ships / planes to support each loaded transport.

Update: second draft posted at the top of the thread based on everyone’s comments. Thank you for commenting!

Progress continues. The circles (victory cities) are 180 pixels wide, which means that every territory should have plenty of room to host a reasonable number of units.

@Azimuth My personal philosophy is that an AA50-style map should aim to incorporate additional territories if and only if they’re needed to improve the functionality of the game.

So, splitting Iraq off from Trans-Jordan to avoid blitzing from Trans-Jordan directly to India…sounds great; that’s an important change that helps provide a richer game that adequately separates the Middle East theater from the South Asian theater. Splitting Syria off as well…I don’t quite see the need. Yes, Syria is fun to have, but it is not obvious that it changes the gameplay. Sure, Syria is part of the Vichy French network, but it’s not like Vichy France becomes unplayable without Syria. You can just add a French infantry to Trans-Jordan or something like that, and you get close enough.

Similarly, splitting off Nigeria makes sense because the British really did have significant holdings in west Africa, and if you just color the entire region as French then that’s a gross oversimplification. However, splitting off Gold Coast as well adds very little additional value. It’s not worth any money. What does having a Gold Coast let the British do that they can’t already do just by having Nigeria? How does Gold Coast change the strategy of the game?

Of course it’s historically defensible to add all these extra territories in, but if you add in every historically justifiable territory then the map will wind up looking more like Global than AA50. Still potentially fun, but you’re aiming at a different target; the game ceases to function as a medium weight map. Just my two cents.

I like the way you’re thinking creatively, and it’s possible there’s some way to exploit the fact that Hawaii can be 100% blocked off from the USA for a turn with only 3 ships – maybe later in the game if you have a fleet in the Carolines or at a Japanese-occupied Midway with a naval base, or something crazy like that. You would also need to make sure ANZAC is not in position to liberate Hawaii after the US can-opens for them.

The specific plan of attack you’re proposing is crazy because you would need twice as many starting forces as Japan actually has to pull it off. J3 India Crush is plausible against a competent opponent, barely, if you send 100% of your starting forces in the general direction of India. The fact that you’re doing a Pearl Harbor attack on J1 means that J3 India Crush is off the table. The fact that you’re also diverting 4 transports and 2 carrier groups to take Hawaii means that you will eat flak and die in India. The most likely result is that you will lose half the Japanese air force while not taking India. Meanwhile, ANZAC eats the money islands, and UK Europe winds up very strong because the Italian fleet sailed away west to capture a 1-IPC territory, and the German fleet sailed away west to knock out 2 American warships, so at least one of the UK Home Fleets likely survived, and the UK winds up with easy/cheap control of the Med and can start convoying Italy right away, and can start landings in France/Holland/Denmark/Norway right away, too.

Another point to keep in mind is that with your bombers busy knocking out the UK battleship, and your transports and air power busy in the Philippines and then India and then Hawaii, you will be very lucky to stalemate China in its current position – you run a real risk of losing Shanghai, which would block your proposed J4 victory. After seeing Germany’s looney-tunes assault on the US Atlantic fleet, Russia can safely build planes and stack Amur and Kazakh on R1, and then declare war on Japan on R2 and invade from both Kazakh and Siberia, giving the starting mechs a decent chance of reaching the Chinese coast on R4, which would also block the proposed J4 victory.

Some of the fussiest rules in the A&A handbook are the rules for bombing runs, interceptors, AAA gunfire, and submarines.

Many people enjoy fussiness; they like learning all of the intricate details of a complicated ruleset and then finding ways to exploit them. That’s fine. If you enjoy complex rules for their own sake, this House Rule is not for you. This House Rule is for people who enjoy complicated gameplay but who want the rules to be as simple as possible. The idea is to get a lot of theme and a lot of strategy without needing too many different rules.

So, here’s my proposal:

Bombers – bombers can make bombing runs against any territory, even if the territory has no factory in it. If you wish, you may escort your bombers with fighters by moving the fighters into the territory. When you make a bombing run, the defender does not get any automatic AAA shots. Instead, the defender rolls one die per flak gun in the territory (flak guns hit on rolls of 1), and one die per fighter in the territory (fighters hit on rolls of 2 or less). For each hit scored by the defender, eliminate one attacking bomber or one attacking escort fighter (attacker’s choice). Any surviving bombers then roll 1d6 and destroy IPCs from the defender’s treasury equal to the value shown on the dice. The defender cannot lose more IPCs from a territory than the territory is worth (e.g. bombing India can lose you at most 3 IPCs), and the defender cannot lose more IPCs than their entire treasury.

Flak Guns – attack at 1, defend at 1, move 1 space, and behave exactly like a regular land unit. They can make a combat move, they can be taken as a casualty, they can conquer territories, and they don’t get a preemptive shot. The only two things that make a flak gun special are that (a) if they score a hit in a battle against you, and you have any planes in that battle, then you have to select one of your planes as the casualty, and (b) flak guns help defend against bombing runs.

Submarines – attack at 2, defend at 1, move 2 spaces, and behave exactly like a regular sea unit. They are blocked by enemy warships, do not submerge, can be hit by planes, can hit planes, and do not make sneak attacks. Instead, each submarine adjacent to an enemy territory during that enemy’s collect income reduces the enemy’s income by 1 IPC. The income from a territory cannot be reduced below zero by submarines. It is recommended (but not required) to raise the defensive value of destroyers from 2 to 3 to help keep submarines balanced.

All of this may sound like a lot to keep straight, but it’s mostly a matter of unlearning some of the fiddly rules that we’re used to playing with. These rules should be easier for new players to learn because they treat all units as essentially the same except for one or two special abilities: instead of submarines behaving totally differently from any other ship and requiring separate rolls and a separate phase of combat, submarines are just ships that are able to deal 1 IPC of industrial damage. Instead of AAA guns behaving totally differently from any other land unit and requiring separate rolls and unique rules for movement and capture, AAA guns are just land units that are able to preferentially target planes when they score a hit.

I’ve made a little progress on the Middleweight Map! The canals should all be working now (they’re marked on the map with graphics, and they’re enforced by the game engine), and the stats for air units have been rebalanced – instead of “jets”, which were hideously overpowered, I now have “divebombers,” which have a strong offense against land units but have a short range and are weak to enemy interceptors. The other air unit stats are also adjusted a little to compensate. Thanks to Karl7 for playtesting and Mike K. for advice on the air stats.

As before, you can download the .zip file that has everything you need to play at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RTTR2kzgPeV82avij5ZI6mXuN5M9ezmi/view?usp=sharing. Unzip the folder and put the contents in C:/Users/[your name]/triplea/downloadedMaps.

@cloud7707 I’m glad to see ongoing interest in this mod and that you are creating your own content, but I disagree with several of your changes; I think they make the game both less fun and less historical.

• The Doolittle Raid scared the heck out of Japan very early in the war and prompted them to keep significant naval forces near the home islands for years to come. As long as you keep 3-4 units in SZ 62, it’s safe enough; fighters alone are not a great attacking unit and it will rarely pay for the US to launch a serious attack directly from SZ 56 (or vice versa). The game is already a little artificial in terms of sending everything to the front lines with zero garrisons, because there is no fog of war and no paratroopers – I would not want to move things even further in that direction by killing off the reason for US & Japan to garrison their home sea zones.

• Australia was a major contributor to the war effort, both in terms of high-quality infantry that fought in the middle east and india, and in terms of providing subs, destroyers, and cruisers that fought in the south Pacific. By making both Australian territories worth only 1 IPC, you destroy the possibility of an Australian factory – or really any south Pacific factory until the game is basically over and you are just building factories in, e.g., Borneo or the Philippines in order to ‘win more’ after Japan has already been decisively pushed back. This makes the already-weak “Kill Japan First” strategy basically impossible.

• Since each game turn represents at least four months, I see no reason why the US shouldn’t be able to transfer fighters directly between the west coast and the coast of Morocco. There are very rarely any sea battles in SZ 56 or SZ 12 once the US has carriers in play that could enable those transfers, so we’re really talking about a non-combat redeployment of forces, and four months is plenty of time to get those planes across the world even if you have to ship them in crates and reassemble them at the end.

@crockett36 Hey there! I’m glad you like it. You are more than welcome to read or summarize my advice on YouTube as long as you give me some credit for it as part of the video – I’m not likely to be recording a YouTube video of Global advice anytime soon.

My thought about strict neutrals is that they’re there to help you punish your opponent when they do something really strange or make a mistake. If neither America nor the UK is putting anything into the Atlantic, for example, then Germany can attack Sweden and Spain while Italy attacks Turkey, and you can mostly get away with it – this can help you take Gibraltar, Egypt, Iraq, etc. without wasting a ton of money on transports. Conversely, if Germany and Italy are dropping huge stacks of infantry into France and Rome but are leaving Poland / Romania / Bulgaria / Greece wide open, and the UK has a big stack of infantry in the Middle East, and Japan has already activated Mongolia as a pro-Allied neutral by invading Amur, then you might be able to attack eastern Europe from the Middle East through Turkey – sure, Germany can walk into Spain and Sweden, but that’s not a big deal; you’re basically allowing them to keep Western Europe in exchange for a British factory in Greece and a Russian tank swarm fueled by the Spread of Communism NO that will ultimately take Berlin before Spanish infantry can reach it.

These are pretty rare scenarios, though, and of 10 games where you’re tempted to invade a strict neutral, you should probably just pass in about 9 of those 10 games and stick to more conventional strategies. The Spanish beachhead is not as exciting as it looks – you’re closer to New York, but you’re correspondingly further from Berlin; it saves you a few bucks on transports, but you lose that money by needing to fight formerly neutral infantry, and the attack as a whole doesn’t necessarily save you any time.

Of course, if your opponent is foolish enough to invade a strict neutral, go claim your prizes! It often makes sense to leave one mech hanging around somewhere near the area where your opponent might be tempted to invade strict neutrals so that you can quickly capitalize on the newly available fighting forces. Once the mech runs in there, you’ll be able to fly in air support and get a decent offensive punch. Be aware that you cannot ever activate neutrals with a plane, so even if neutrals are ‘on your side’, they are still off-limits to your planes until you move a land unit into their territories.

I’m glad people are interested in this idea!

That said, I really don’t have strong opinions about the best way to adjudicate bombing runs on supply crates. That’s just not the part of the house rule that excites me. I would ideally want to keep the bombing rules very simple, so as not to require a lot of accounting or distract attention from other parts of the game, but if you have a set of complicated bombing rules that you and your friends enjoy, then go wild. There’s nothing wrong with that.

If you’re looking for my ideal bombing rules, I will try to explain them one more time:

1. Choose to target the supply crate rather than another facility. Any number of bombers can target the same crate
2. Suffer from AA fire and fighter interceptors as normal. Only surviving bombers can roll dice against crates.
3. If at least one bomber rolls a 4, 5, or 6, then completely destroy the crate that was targeted.
4. Ignore rolls of 1, 2, or 3. Do not partially damage crates.

These rules should generate slightly less economic payoff than ordinary strategic bombing…if your bomber gets through, you do an average of 2.5 damage, instead of 3.5 damage on a successful regular run. If you want more damage, you can allow hits on rolls of 3, as well.

@the-janus Interesting. I’m an amateur developer and many of these changes would be relatively easy for me to code – turning off capitals is not hard, permanently awarding Chinese territories to the British is not hard, and even the diplomacy is probably doable. The nukes are probably weird and rare enough that it makes sense to just do them manually for now. I could add a ‘dummy’ nuke unit on the map that you can move around and so on, and then when you’re ready to fire it, we would just roll a die and use edit mode to resolve the effects.

If you want to send me whatever files you have and if you’d be willing to play a couple of games once the module is ready, I’ll see what I can make happen. No promises, but I think I would probably be able to hack something playable together in a month or so.

If you’re interested, send me a list of your top 10-ish highest priority changes from the Classic map/ruleset. I need a medium amount of detail, I think – like I’m not sure why China goes British, specifically, and not American. If there’s a short rulebook (<= 30 pages) that spells all this out, then send me a link and I’ll read it; otherwise I need you to tell me.