Posts made by Dafyd

The ANZACs can make a difference.  I have used them to help defend Calcutta and if possible, Hong Kong and to help defend Borneo as well as taking Java and Celebs.  But I also like to use them to take the Carolines.  It gives the US a needed air/naval base to launch out from in various directions, including Japan.  I’ve never activated Brazil with the ANZACs because the US or UK have done so early on in the war.  I do like getting them to China to harass the Japanese.  ANZACs in Africa is always a good play but I have found it to be a later-in-the-game tactic.  Using the ANZACs as a can opener for the US Pacific operations (like Germany uses Italy) seems to me to be the most advantageous tactic since those operations are in the ANZAC theater.  It just seems to be a long time on transports before engaging the enemy if you head to Europe.

The ANZAC I/C in Persia is an interesting idea though.  Using the ANZACs to secure the middle east would free up the UK to focus on Calcutta and Cairo as well as helping to secure the Caucuses for the soviets.

Yes Young Grasshopper; that is exactly what I was trying to say.  I like the idea of a score at the end of the day.  Arwaker’s plan has some interesting potential as well.  I would imagine it is hard to get some groups together and this type of “scoring” would at least give these groups a chance to know who won the “war”.

The group I play with is usually who ever we can through together for a day.  It’s real hard to get everyone’s schedule to line up enough to get back to a game.  I like the idea of the “baseball” score.  I noticed that the axis can score 56 points and the allies 55.  Are you suggesting scoring by the percentage of possible points per faction?  Say the axis capture: Manila (2), Shangai (1), hong Kong(2), Lenningrad(3), Cairo(3), Rome(2), Warsaw(2), Berlin(1), and Paris(1).  That is 17 points which is 30.4% of the possible 56 points available for the axis.  That leaves the allies with 15 points or 27.3% of the available 55 points for the allies.  It’s close.  The allies would suffer in a lower number of rounds because they have to ramp up production thus have a shorter amount of time to capture the cities needed to score higher. I guess the Japanese player would be less likely to wander in the Chinese countryside or the Siberean wilderness.  Focus would be on the defense and the attack of the cities rather than a domination and securing of flanks.  This would also allow for extra cities to be added to enhance the scoring.

I have played both Global games and I have to admit, I like the convoy boxes of Global 39.  They are in the middle of the Atlantic and Pacific.  The axis players can really be a pain in the neck to the allies with those convoy boxes.  The allies have to respond to axis subs bleeding off all of those IPC’s.  JUst more diversionary tactics to keep the allies busy without having to engage in heavy (expensive) sea battles.

Since the Commonwealth shares all technology, they would all roll for their bond “Drive” in the collect income phase.  ANZAC, FEC, Canada, UK, even South Africa if played seperately would all roll for each “nation’s” bond value.  If UK springs for advanced radar, they all have advanced radar.  SAme with improved shipyards or advanced infantry tactics.  It is all shared.

So you play to keep the axis from getting the victory cities rather than to defeat the axis by taking their capitols.  So the US player is reduced to being a bank and a harassment to the Japanese. Thanks for the option.

Good day.  I am finally playing the US in the Global 39 game and I am interested in any suggestions for playing the US in this game.  I have already been drawn into the war on round 4 by a surprise Japanese attack.  Fortunately it was a small fleet.  I had an production level of 58 at the time.  I had built 6 destroyers in the previous rounds all for the Atlantic side.  Gotta kill the u-boats.  On my first full production round, I attempted a 20IPC lend to the FEC and the ANZAC player inorder to upgrade their factories.  The FEC received half while the full amount went through to the ANZACs.

I have landed in Rio De Oro which is in UK hands.  In the previous versions of the game, Gibraltor is with in reach of the US naval bases. A shuttle system is easy.  In “39”, it takes two turns and you end up with a fleet just sitting in the Atlantic.  I can hear the wolf packs howling now.  It was suggested by one of the other players to build the naval base in Panama on the Atlantic side.  A minor IC would be handy there as well.  I have played the US to be more invasion oriented on the Atlantic side and more of the hunting type of fleet on the Pacific side but I am always looking to learn more about the game.  Thanks.

We had a situation in a current game where the Greek navy was rolled for after Greece was captured by the Italians.  Most of the ships were skuttled but one was allowed to "escape to the nearest allied naval base.  The problem was that all of the sea zones around the escaping ship were surrounded by Italian surface ships.  Just for game play, we ruled that the ship should be allowed to go to the nearest allied naval base which is one space away in Tobruc? (North Africa) instead of SZ81 which is on the inside of the Suez Canal.  We further ruled that on the next UL turn that the Greek survivor would have to fight any enemy ships that may remain in the sea zone.  The Greek ship was lost of course.  Should the ship have been skuttled durring the Italian’s rolling phase since it was surrounded on each side? Thanks for your help.

I have played Germany only a few times in our group but I have noticed that none of our group of players has tried the operation sealion stratergy.  I believe it could work if the German player slowly bilds the transport fleet.  This gives no major alarm but does give some options.  Invasion of Leningrad is an option.  It seems like a lot for such a short distance but it can make the Soviet and British player nervous enough to make a mistake or become obsessed with defending the invasion which means other areas are being neglected.  Misdirection can be a powerful weapon.  There have been times I know that the German player would have loved to have a couple transports when the UK player was so focused on Africa and left London lightly protected.  Saying that, if the object of the game is victory cities, best bomb London’s IC, air fields and harbours into dust.  They will either spend money to rebuild or they will turtle with what build they can make.  Either way, the UK becomes less of a threat and the focus is then on THREE Soviet victory cities and the rich Caucus and middle east oil fields.

Wouldn’t invading Yugoslavia, a pro-allied nation, provoke the European allies into action?

If all things were equal, I could see your point Der Kuenstler, but not all things are equal.  An Iowa class BB would not “normally” be sunk by a single torpedo.  The BB’s were built to take a punch as well as deliver them.  Submarines are not built to stand in a toe-to-toe battle with a BB.  It’s not a fair fight.  I could see throwing a single submarine at a lone BB if the intent is to wound it making it more likley to seek a naval base to be repaired than to advance in an operation.  I can’t see expecting the single sub to sink the BB in a stand alone fight.  Wolf-pak them.  You would definately have a chance with three or four against one.

This sounds like an interesting stratergy.  The end result will be a US that is helped toward getting it’s war time level but still, getting the Soviets out of the way early does have its advantages.  As for your questions, I am by no means a scholar of the rules but I have read it over and over again; use common sence.

So:
(1) I would say yes to the Japanese and the Italians being able to attack strick nuetrals.  Historically, they did.  It only makes sence that they could do so again.

(2)Again, as long as the axis powers do not attack a pro-allied nuetral, then there is no reason for the allies to activate them until the allies are at war.  That being said, it is a standard move in A&A for Calcutta to march or transport forces over to Persia and activate those pro-allied nations in the middle east of coarse this is done because Greta Britian is at war and the commonwealth is apart of that effort.  If Great Britian is not at war, than Calcutta is not obligated to “save” Persia.  I’m trying to work this out in my head.  America is played in all of the previous versions as not being able to activate pro-allied territories because they are nuetral until drawn into the war.  If Great Britian (the Commonwealth), France, or Poland are not attacked and drawn into the war, then they should be respecting the sovregnty of the independent pro-allied nations. If the axis does attack a strict nuetral, if the capitol remains, then the remaining territories should go pro-alled and the allies should be able to come to their rescue.  The ships will then be rolled on as the rules state.  If the capitol is taken first, the ships will be rolled on as stated in the rules and the allied converted ships will go to the nearest allied fleet which would be Great Britian’s fleet at Cairo.  The remaining nuetral territories would still have to be battled for as the nuetrals would normally defend but they would be on their own.  No allied interference.  My thinking is that if the capitol remains, there is an effective government to request allied support.  If the capitol falls, the remaining armies in the out side territories would be fighting independently within their own territory.

(3) We have house ruled that the minor IC’s remain.  The turn after their capture, the capturing force can use the facility.

(3)

Good luck. I hope it works for you.

Quite right Koba.  Set up for the oppurtunity but one must wait for the right time.  I like to have options.  The Commonwealth in the west is usually reduced to stragic bombing runs by round five or six.  The Germans invest in rockets and then pummel London’s and Liverpool’s factories and air bases.  Anything that floats from CAnada to England is sunk by wolfpacks.  America is the real enemy by the time they come into the war.  I do like the idea of the northern attack on the americas as well.  The S.A. move is usually a failure in the end but as I said, just a diversion.  If oppurtunity arises in some bad allied play or mistakes, having multiple options is adventageous.  If nothing else. I will learn to do a mean funky chicken… and have fun doing it after all.

That is why I try to activate Argentina.  To get America’s attention.  I always wait until they’re in the war.  It takes time set up the Italian can opener and manuever a Grerman transport plane and paratroopers into position in Rio del Oro with an air base.  It’s nor about the money or even the fleet which are just perks but the point is to divert American resources to deal with an axis South America rather than those same resources being directed at Europe and the Pacific.  As my friend Larrie always says, “You have to lead the dance.”  Make the opponent react to the unexpected.  A sacrifice of troops…yes, but it can be an adventageous diversion giving the axis the time they need to move on the cities required for victory.  To ignore an axis South America could be enough of a thorn to the USA that if not acted on could result in a “RED DAWN” (the original) effect…axis troops, reenforced by the Japanese and Italians moving up the center of the country.  A really wide strech of the imagination but what if…

You’re right about the timing Koba.  I like to send lots of german uboats (10-12) throughout the Atlantic and with the wolf pack rule in 39, this is an affective way to force the Candians, English, and Americans to spend money on destroyers instead of transports.  While they hunt the wolf packs, the Italians and germans build a transport and paratrooper a turn in order to be ready to move enough troops to South America that will require the American’s attention.  They may get squashed but the diversion is enough to allow more time for the German’s to capture Soviet cities and activate the Spanish.  Nice fleet to help slow an eventual American landing in Africa.

It is a great map and a good size but it can still get crowded in some territories.  I had made a Global 40 map based on the games printed board that fit on a 4x8 sheet of masonite.  The bigger map is the only way to go.

I have played Germany a couple of times now and I was wondering if anyone else has been able to activate Argentina’s three territories.  I have been able to do so once and we had to end a game early so I didn’t have the oppertunity to do so again but the plan was in the works.  I know that it is not a victory condition but I have found it helpful.  The free fleet in the south is nice to convoy raid and the presence of axis troops in South America has made the American player redirect some efforts to secure and combat the South American threat keeping them out of Europe a little longer.  If you have activated Argentina, how did you get there?  I have found that if the Italians take French De Oro and add an air base there; they can paratroop into southern Brazil and secure a landing space for a German transport plane with paratrooper flying into Argentina to activate the country.  Every time I have tried with naval forces, the USA have enough there to either block my transports or kill the fleet securing them.  What do you think about activating South America for the axis.?

I believe it for the gamesmanship.  It makes Greece a little more of a fight.  One legitamate territory is now split into three destinct territories.  Exagerating the canal into a full blown body of water makes the British or Italians produce or keep transports just to get to Corinth instead of just walking in.  Hightens the challenge.  The map is not exactly geographically accurate in a couple of places but it adds to the playability of the game.  Look at North Africa.  In Global 39 the Sahara desert is reduced in comparison to Europe 1940 in order to add more French territories to fight over.

I tried a late game move on London using German paratroopers.  I had been adding them to my buys and scattering them about the German air bases within reach of London.  The ploy almost worked but the UK player noticed a dozen paratroopers just standing around and beefed up his defenses.  In hind-sight, I should of hit his factories and air bases a round before and then make the move.  This was a round fifteen attack.  I just wanted to make sure that I had morethan enough cities for the Axis victory.  London stood but Singapore couldn’t hold or be rescued by the Allies. I’m really begining to appreciate the paratroopers.