Posts made by Bob_A_Mickelson

IL

where do you get your miniatures for the additional units i see in your games?  Also what scale should I buy to use along side my revised axis and allies pieces?

UPDATED 11/02/08

Version 3.3 Complete Packet with improved and updated Graphics (graphics require Power Point 2007)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/gime0wygmau/Global Conflict 3.3.zip

New Screenshots of Axis & Allies Global Conflict Setup

Another picture of the board set up, compliments of craigbee. http://www.craig-bartell.com/images/map.jpg

In a nutshell Global Conflict is a game that combines the best from A&A Europe and Pacific on a large 30’ X 60’ modified Europe-Pacific world map.  Elements from other A&A versions have been added as well, though they are not nearly as extensive. A 5 player game can be completed in six hours! due to Global Conflict’s simitanious movement system. (The rulebook is a carbon copy of the Axis & Allies Revised Edition rulebook with any changes, additions, or deletions highlighted in red for your convience.) All Global Conflict Versions use Global Conflict Map 3.1

Changes include but are not limited to:
Mechanized Division unit
Blockhouse unit
Air Transport/Paratrooper unit
Japanese Kamikaze unit
Cruiser unit
Escort unit
New Technologies and Tech Rules
Revised Convoy rules to stimulate more naval battles
Supply Tokens used instead of traditional IPC’s (does a lot to to balance gameplay)
Optional National Advantages for each nation.

Previous Versions
Version 3.2 Complete Packet with New Graphics (graphics require Power Point 2007)
http://www.mediafire.com/?scnjytnzhnd
Version 3.1 Limited Graphics
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?ehbczz4au54

And once again, thanks for everyone here and elsewhere that helped with the project.
-Bob A Mickelson-

Post any questions, suggestions, or game reviews here.

Considering all the feedback I have received from my first public release of Global Conflict on this form and other outlets, **I have now released my third edition of Global Conflict. **

It is much more balanced than before. Minor changes to setup makes Germany be a more threatening adversary. The Allied economic dominance has been addressed with modified convoy rules and also the edition of supply tokens.  Long game play time has been addressed with a new turn sequence which should keep all players more involved with very little idle time. A close competitive game with five players can now be completed in less than six hours. (This does not including setup). Technology rules have also been modified. Three new units have been included. They are Mechanized Divisions, Air Transports, and Cruisers.  (If you don’t have these units, replace all cruisers in the setup with destroyers, and ignore mechanized devisions and air transports.  Play will still be balanced)

I hope all of you enjoy the game.  And as always all comments, suggestions, and game reviews are welcome.

This is the link to all the files you need
http://www.mediafire.com/?2gmbdgml0zy

what are the dimintions of the tiles?  How heavy and thick are they?  Do you know if there is a good way to print A&A maps out on some sort of vinyl or cloth which will lay flat on a table without bunching up?  Also do you know of anyone who could print the map out on a traditional folding game board?  (probably three separate folding game boards for a map this side)

www.AAAflagbanner.com doesn’t work.  are you sure this is the exact webpage address?

Looks great!

What do you print your map out on?  Is it cloth or is it on some kind of gameboard cardboard?  Is there anyway i could send you a file to print for me?

aboslute0233 and everyone else

I will be more than willing to implement your new transport convoy rule if someone can give me a reasonably justifiable explication for why the allies aren’t collecting them on the first turn. (especially USA and russia which arnt at war yet)  I realize the rule works practically, but i would like to have a historical purpose for it.

if not i suggest we implement the transport convoy rule under these conditions:
1.Add or move a transport into each convoy zone at the start of the game. To represent  undisrupted trade, (UK would have its Atlantic convoys without transports, due to the proceeding U-boat war)
2.Give Germany five more fighters, one in Normandy, Germany, Austria, Hungry, and Bulgaria

This is Why…
Currently there are 10 convoy spaces without transports in them. That totals $50.  Germany gets 5 new fighters ($50 value) which will be needed badly in Russia, plus it GIVES GERMANY ITS TEETH BACK! I figure that Germany should be able to destroy the three extra  transports added in the Atlantic first turn without a problem.  Japan should also be able to easily destroy England’s two pacific convoys, Russia’s pacific, and one of USA on the first turn too.  This means that turn two should look like your game’s turn two, with the exception of the five extra fighters which Germany could use to attack and defend on the Russian front / and or the atlantic .

Five fighters may be too much, but if it wouldn’t break the game, i think we should do it.  Germany need the Luftwaffe.

Here’s the “working” updated version of the rule book. It replaces IPCs with supply tokens, sides move (but dont resolve combat) at same time for shorter game time, Phases have been reordered, and CAPs removed.  IT does not have the updated TECHNOLOGY rules i have mentioned, nor does it include in it any of the comments above.

rulebook
http://www.mediafire.com/?7zmsddm4tbz
setup with supply tokens
http://www.mediafire.com/?ahqrzrdw0zv

The Gameboard and most of the setup is based on Europe and pacific.  The rule book is the revised rulebook with some changes added.  I want people to be able to play it without much relearning.  Thats why its the revised rule book.  Any changes have been highlighted in red so someone doesn’t have to read the whole book if they are familiar with the revised edition.  If i did my job right the rule book should read very fluidly from beginning to end.
aboslute0233
One more thing when you played with the “transports in the convoy rule”  did that mean that starting income was lower for allied players?

I’m actually surprised that people cant overcome the economic differences in gameplay.  Mathematically  The incomes are actually more favorable to the axis than Europe and pacific were.  From my experience, its not the income that the problem its the fact that nations can build so many places.  (Using supply tokens in the revised edition addresses this issue, though it probably wont be enough)

tekkyy
Do you mean that i should publish a printable/playable map with units on it? Because I found  that some of the territories don’t have enough room to do this and still look good.  My current thought is releasing a National Production Chart/Tech Chart that has a shrunk map on the reverse with units on it.  This small map would replace the setup charts, and i believe speed up set up time.

Thanks for the feedback.  Contrary to most peoples initial perception, the game does not favor the allies.  In fact Playtesting has yet to provide an axis victory.  Problems tend to stem from allied income, and technology.  In fact no other complaints about gameplay have arrisen.

Im in the process of revising the rules for a final time.  Tweaking both of these areas, to make them more ballanced.  Both these issues have been addressed.  Your convoy rule seems intreaging.

aboslute0233
When you played with your revised convoy rules did a country have to have its own transport in its convoy zone to collect ipc, or could another country place a transport there? aka could britian send a transport to the soviet zone to so russia could collect more income?  Also, a few people played with supply tokens rather than ipc, which seems to balance the game a bit.  Did you do so also?  Finally, how bad did germany lose in your games?  about how many cities was it able to hold on to?

thanks for the info.

@Dagon81:

Already uploaded the map. Its in .psd (photoshop format)… download it here:
…
To download these files you need pando too, its very easy to install. Its the best choice I could do regarding the size of this map…

Where is “here”?  could you post a link to the download.

CraigBee

Sorry for the oversight on my part
This is the corrected setup
    NORTHERN INDIA - 1 INF, 1 ART
    CALCUTTA - 2 INF, AAGUN, COMPLEX
    SOUTHERN INDIA - 3 INF, 1 FIGHTER, AAGUN, COMPLEX

(Ive also updated the links)

CraigBee
I’ve toyed with different colors schemes, but since I did the entire process on a trial version of photoshop its pretty difficult to alter now.  I basically would have to color it in microsoft paint, and it tends to look unnatural when colors are changed. So the colors will change for the time being.

As for the neutral rule.  I like neutral counties having units, but have a problem with then never being able to build more.  Hypothetically if someone invaded a neutral and the neutral wasn’t conquered wouldn’t it make sense for the neutral to build more units.  However I have not discovered a good way to do this.  As an alternative to neutral unit placement i came up with this rule using non real simulated units:

“Only the Axis may violate Political Neutrality.  Violating political neutrality must take place in the Combat Move phase. The Axis player attacks as normal, keeping track of the number of hits scored. An Allied player then rolls six die for each IPC the territory is worth. The Axis player removes one invading unit for each die roll equal to or lower than the territory’s IPC value. Combat is now complete. If the Axis player does not have any surviving land units or if he did not score as many hits as the territory’s IPC value he must retreat.  Any units not capable of retreating are treated as causalities.”

using this rule there is no actual units present on the board.  It also means the axis can be defeated.  If the Axis player attacks again he will face the same odds as before not a depleted neutral force as is the case in statically placed neutral armies.

someone could carefully determine that in order to sucessfully invade netural country a axis player is stasticly likely to to recieve these casulities:

1 ipc = 1 unit lost
2 ipc = 4 units lost
3 ipc = 9 units lost

Here New Updated map with territories and IPC values final (except possibally neutral mongoilia)
http://www.mediafire.com/?cjomfz2sy9u

here is the revised setup
http://www.mediafire.com/?7t9yuziv090

And here is the rule book (same as before not re-revised yet)
http://www.mediafire.com/?cbkmvgviidu

Hope it helped.

CraigBee

1. There are three Axis Nations (Germany, Italy, and Japan)  Therefore it is possible to have twenty victory cities without having any single axis power having 10.

2.  A careful reading of the rules will show that a blockhouse could be better than a tank when defending against an amphibious assault.  This is for two reasons.  First the blockhouse has a targeted attack so it can chose who it hits (during the first round of combat)  Secondly, it fires twice in the first round of an amphibious assault.  once at a three (targeted) and once later at a one (no targeted).  So in my opinion blockhouses are worth buying.

3.  The 2 hit German tank does not exist.  it was simply a suggestion which has not been implemented.  I personally don’t like a two hit tank or a production limit rule.

4.  I have play tested it twice.  Both times it was a pretty even match.  The Japanese navy is huge (primarily because they wont be able to afford it later on) however this is offset by the USA huge 100 IPC income.

5. Yes  some nicer setup charts would be greatly appreciated.  I am now revising the setup for the final time and  some territory ipc values have been tweaked.  I will upload them soon.

For your info.  Based on the feedback of others I will also be revising the rules one last time. Because there are so many players everyone tends to sit around waiting a lot, which makes the game less exciting.  I have been encouraged by others to let the Axis Nations move at the same time, and Then let the allies move all at once.  (with the conduct combat phase being resolved separately for each nation)  I have also elected not to use the IPC dollar bills.  Instead each player will place supply tokens (1 token = 1 IPC) at their complexes during their collect income phase.  Players must use the supplies at the complex for purchases.  Note this does mean that a player could capture supplies if he captured a hostile complex.  And finally capturing a capital does not prevent a player from building or collecting income.  However a player cannot claim victory if his capital is occupied by an enemy.

Phases would go something like this
1. Develop weapons
2. Purchase
3. Combat Move
4. Conduct combat
    (resolve each nation’s attacks separately)
5. Non Combat Move
6. Place Units
7. Place supply Tokens

Is there any way to change the color scheme without using Adobe Illistrator?  If so what will be needed to do it?

Sorry for the Christmas break absence.

Admiral_Thrawn
It is important to remember that this map is designed to play as a game.  It is not intended to be 100% historically accurate.  Its meant to simulate real events in a fun way.  The game rules could be picked at again and again.  Players will have to accept the fact that the game is not historical fact.  Axis and Allies has always taken some artistic leave in its creation.  I did the same.  The map is distorted. Absolutely.  It was deliberate.  Some areas need more attention than others.  This meant Enlarging Europe, Shrinking the Americas, and compromising the best I could with the rest of the map. So thats why Africa looks distorted.  If the map was truly to scale it would be twice as large.  And I thought 6’X3’ was plenty big.
Imperious Leader
Did you receive the new file format?  Will it help in creating the alternative color scheme, that people seem to favor?

Imperious

I emailed you the background image of the map in a couple of formats.  I hope it helps. (I got the files as small as I could.)

Just updated some minor changes on the maps.  the links in the first post now go to the updated maps.  Both are in PNG form.

Imperious Leader
My computer isn’t that fast.  Its about 750 MB running xp.  I takes 3 minutes to load or save.  Like I said on the disk.  I made the map using a trial version, so I cant make anymore changes to it for the time being.  The Print at 50 percent PNG file is exactly what the photoshop version looks like once its merged, minus the two added sea zones.  I used photoshop cs3 extended trial demo to make the map.  Here is the link https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/tdrc/index.cfm?product=photoshop

Clarification,

Does the truck represent mechanical infantry by itself, or would you need to bring an infantry piece along with the truck?

Two hits on a tiger is a good idea.  Sherman tanks (and i know the Russians didn’t use these tanks, and USA and Britian had other tanks, but they were a very slim minority) had difficulty piercing the Panther tank’s armor.  Quite often Sherman shells simply bounced off the Panther’s armor.  The Tiger, and particularly the King Tiger had much more armor than the Panther so two hits sound like a good idea.  The point of limiting the range was to avoid blitzing with this tank. This tank strength was definitely not blitzing.

The supply truck/mechanized infantry situation is a bit harder.  It must cost less that a tank and at least as much as an infantry. That leaves its cost at $3-4, probably $4. The key is to make it different, not necessarily better than infantry and artery.  Infantry and artery (and tanks) must be the backbone of land warfare.  I would hate it if we found game after game, people building more trucks than infantry or artery.

Tekkyy I like your mechanized armor idea, but am afraid that it will discourage people from buying artery.

The point of making a destroyer attack 2 and defense 3 is simply to shake up and add variety to sea units.  The addition of a cruiser necessities lowering the destroyer’s stats.  However if we drop it to A2 D2 then its too much like a sub.  By varying it’s attack and defense values (and by making cruisers faster) it allows for much more varied naval strategies.  Something I cant see as a bad thing.