I was thinking further on the subject of expansions. I used to play Star Fleet Battles and they had a module come out every year or so.
What if WotC published a small rule book with some cardboard chits called “Facilities and terrain.” It would be say an expansion pack (to any A&A game) that could include the following: 1) research facilities; 2) Sub-Pens; 3) defensive zones (eg. Maginot line); 4) Rough terrain; 5) Seasons; 6) Characters.
Charge enough to break even + 10%. Just an idea.
This is a cool idea. I think I would be very interested in something like this if it could be adjustable to fit my other games as well.
My View on building new Allied factories, anywhere is basically this: See what the Axis focus on. After reading some people’s opening moves with the Axis it would seem that let the axis do their thing and then size up the situation.
It boils down to this:
The Axis have the initiative.
See what happens, dont plan out U.K. first move until they go. I mean, building factories is a legit strategy, but wheather it goes in Egypt, Western India or where is really up to the axis.
Personally in all the other editions I have played (my first gam of global is Sept 5.10) Egypt is a great place provided the axis can’t take it over.
One game of Anniversary I played I jump the gun, built a factory in India UK T1 and guess what happend, It was Japans on their next turn.
Anyway, that’s my two cents.
Unless you upgrade the factory from minor to major the following turn in which case you can build 6 units.
Certainly selling downloadable rules wouldn;t be free, but it could be cheap.
Well, I haven’t played yet, but it has been sitting in my War Room, set up for 4 days now. It’s very impressive. I’m looking forward to my first game on Sunday, provided the Hurricane doesn’t hit us.
Anyway, look at my previous post:
Rather than come out with a new game every year or every other year, keep the current game board and do some of the following:
Make new rules for technology, heavy weapons, diplomacy, N.O., N.A., or even how sue for peace; publish them online and charge $2.00 per download. (yes there will copy right infringement so you may have to order them online and have them shipped).
Make new units sculpts (should be easy look at A&A minis). It seems alot of people love truely acurate moulds.
sell “additional unit” packs (in case your in a group that doesn’t like those grey chips), hell just sell ALL the components separately (Hell, I’ll buy more roundels).
I guess I would like to see a consistent growing of the game. Buying a new edition where certain units’ rules have changed is fine, but have it in the context of “optional” or “experimental” would be good before it becomes a “final” rules change.
Also, I think that if you owned the “Master Game board” you could pick and choose which components that you want ed to use would be fun. I don’t think that everyone would use every rule but most people would buy each expansion and add on for a sense of completeness.
Look at a game like Settlers of Catan. You can buy the base game, but then add on when you want a better challenge.
Thanks you. I must have read someone’s house rules or something.
I thought I had read some where that you must use transport to invade Gibralter.
No I think you misunderstood. When attacking Gibraltar from Africa (as you originally asked) you would need to attack over sea using transports. If you were coming through Spain you could just use land units.
I am asking if you need transports to attack Gibralter from any/every (Spain) territory. It’s clear you need them from Morrocco.
Do I understand correctly that Gibralter (while not actually an island) is considered an island (basically so you can’t move from Spain to Gibralter without transports)?
but it says at the end of turn 3.
No, it says at the beginning of the Collect Income phase of turn 3.
Has there been a ruling on New Brunswick Boardering Quebec yet?
No, but my money’s on them being adjacent.
Thanks Kreig.
It might be feasable if you Capture London. You use this as a staging point to land in Canada.
then logically, Nova and Quebec border each other
That doesn’t necessarily follow. The four spaces appear to meet at a point, which indicates that Eastern United States doesn’t border sea zone 106 and Quebec doesn’t border New Brunswick/Nova Scotia. The question is whether the St. Lawrence Seaway is meant to be an extension of sea zone 106, dividing the latter two territories, or just a passable border between them.
Has there been a ruling on New Brunswick Boardering Quebec yet?
So we’ve got our first global game coming up this weekend, but there is a slight problem.
I invited many people figuring some wouldn’t make it and now I’m left with 7 players, including myself :-oSo here’s my idea,
Player 1: UK
Player 2: US
Player 3: USSR
Player 4: Japan
Player 5: Germany
Player 6: Italy
Player 7: France, China, and ANZACBasically I’m hoping that extra player will be kept largely busy with ANZAC and China. France at least at the beginning and perhaps later if it’s liberated.
Thoughts?
I like this idea for a seven player game. Seems that the 7th guy would still be involved even if he had the three minor powers.
@mwindianapolis:
This was the answer I was expecting.
Then why ask? Needed affirmation?
Well yes, especially if I game with some yahoo at a tournament in Minneapolis.
This was the answer I was expecting.
Great idea Gargantua. I may actually try this. Preventing the U.S.A. from taking Spain might be the best reason FOR Germany to take Spain.
You’ll have to come up for a name of this maneuver, like the “American Express” or the Spainish conection!
@Col.:
The 6 free infantry can be deployed in any original Russian territory in their eastern provinces (i.e. the two Pacific boards) at the beginning of Japan’s Combat Move when they declare war (although I don’t know why Japan would declare and not attack).
But it is so interesting that Larry left it up to the players to decide what the terms are, so it can be different every game (though a standard will probably emerge, especially for tournaments). Heck, you can choose off-the-board terms if you want, I guess: if Japan breaks the treaty, they have to take a shot of vodka, and if Russia violates, they take a shot of sake, thus impairing them for the rest of the game.
Hell, I haven’t played a game of Axis & Allies alcohol free since 1991
I have read several threads and the rulebook and from what I understand it is up to the players to determine the guidelines for their political status etc. So, my question is; could Japan and Russia agree that who ever is attacked get free units?
This would be much like the non-aggression rule in A&A Revised under National Advantages. I believe Russia got four free infantry if Japan attacked first.
I guess that the answer is no, but I am curious to see what others think of this?