I’m currently based in Manchester so normally this wouldn’t be too difficult for me to get to but unfortunately I’m going on holiday for 2 weeks in the middle of May so can’t do the date.
Nonetheless, hope the event is a success and please do promote any subsequent games as I would be interested.
Even the design of Anzac, which could very well have provided this, fails to do so. No IC in New Zealand for example, and so many other minor hang ups, that of course Japan is never going to gun for New Guinea/Sydney/NZ/Guadalcanal over say Moscow/India, since a Pacific thrust has no Endgame pay off for Axis. Alas!
Brilliant analysis Black Elk, completely agree. Would be interesting to see a custom map appear that incorporates some of these ideas. More factories (probably with some simple rules that restrict the types of units that can be placed there) could radically transform the strategic options in A&A…
Sounds great.
Wittman - I am actually on the West side of central London but not sure if that makes an appreciable difference.
I am split between London and Manchester, I have a group for FTF games in Manchester but trying to build up/get involved in a group in London.
Excellent news indeed, FTF would be great, dont really do forum games as a personal preference. I’m actually fairly busy at the moment but do keep me in the loop and my situation should improve soon too.
If any other UK players are reading this please do make yourself known!
So, this thread is old and dormant but I am a UK player, split between London and Manchester. If anyone is interested in games or if anyone has managed to get a group going I’d be interested. I play AA42SE and G40 mostly.
I’m London based, its nice to know that not everyone on the forum is in the US!
In terms of games, I have copies of AARe, AA42SE, AAG40, AA41 (and a growing collection of HBG pieces…) but I only play either AA42SE or G40.
After your R1 sequence of: Germany, Russia, France, Japan, Britain, Commonwealth, Italy, America, do you revert back to the G40 2nd ed. normal player sequence for R2 and onwards?
my ideal breakdown (with South Africa, S.W. Africa, under Newfoundland also under Commonwealth control)… for the 20/35 split on starting income.
Agreed. I play with South Africa and SW Africa as part of a Commonwealth with Australia and Canada. I use this structure because:
1. A stronger starting income of 20IPCs simply makes it a better power to play for the Commonwealth player, whereas the marginal benefit of that income going to the UK doesn’t notably enhance the play of that power IMO.
2. Helps to balance the game by giving the Commonwealth the income to take greater advantage of some relatively secure industrial complexes (Canada most notably). Basically, the more income the Commonwealth has the more units the Allies will be able to put into the Atlantic through Canada or the Indian Ocean through S. Africa and bring greater force to bear more quickly against the Axis.
3. It seems most historically natural
I like that oil refinery idea. A generic piece or marker which could stand in as +X for a territory at collect income is a very easy way to keep all this stuff visually out in the open. It also seems simple to implement, which of course is my preference. I might try a rule like that sometime as a NO alternative.
Glad you like it, FYI when we play with this rule we give the following nations oil refineries in these territories at the stated quantities:
We treat them as facilities which cannot be destroyed, only captured, but that can be subject to strategic bombing raids (inoperable at 3 damage points). For markers, we just use some blank factory tokens that came with my copies of G40.
On DoW, I agree that removing all restrictions and treating the first round as more abstract is an appealing option.
My only concern is what are the effects (if any) on game balance if you use a G40 SE OOB set up but play with all nations at war from the start? Has anyone done this and if so do you think it is viable? Presumably it inhibits the Axis slightly as 2 extra Allied players can counter them straight away from R1 rather than R3 and R4? Would love to hear some play test feedback on this.
I also play with this house rule, I use South Africa to take the starting IPCs for the Commonwealth to 20 IPCs but have no restrictions on what the Commonwealth can buy or how it has to split its income.
In my experience, it works well. The UK play is simplified by eliminating the 2 economies rule, ANZAC is much more interesting to play as a standalone Commonwealth nation with the much increased starting IPCs and it helps the Allies by introducing a player that can switch its effort between the 3 main theatres of Europe/Mid East/Pacific with relative ease thanks to the ability to produce in Canada, South Africa or Australia.
Yes, as Spitfired said, UK should be one economy and one player, not 3.
If UK want to place 10 units in London and none in India, every turn, that should be a decision of the UK player, and not the game designer. I believe they added the ANZAC and Indian players for no good reasons.
To clarify, I keep ANZAC as a bigger player (renamed the Commonwealth) but do eliminate the UK Pacific/“Indian” player.
Thus, I operate with 2 players (1. UK; 2. Commonwealth) rather than the OOB 3 (1. UK Europe; 2. UK Pacific; 3. ANZAC).
I have also wrestled with how to simplify G40; I agree overwhelmingly with your opening post Black Elk. I think a G40 that keeps the OOB unit placement but with revised DoW/turn order, NOs is the only way to truly simplify.
For my house rules I make 2 main changes:
1. Eliminate UK 2 economies rule by expanding ANZAC into a player called the Commonwealth (Commonwealth = original ANZAC + South Africa + Canada; updated UK = original UK + UK Pacific territories - UK territories handed to Commonwealth). This also has the bonus of making the Commonwealth a much more interesting nation to play than ANZAC.
2. Replace all NOs with oil refineries worth 3 IPCs each to boost the value of certain territories. This can also provide an easy balancing mechanism depending on how many refineries you place in Allied vs. Axis controlled territories at the start.
(Search for the thread ‘Global Streamlined Package’.)
I haven’t experimented with changing the DoW rules but think different DoW rules in conjunction with the above would complete the simplification for me so would be interested to read further suggestions in that area particularly.
+1 for the map, would definatelly appreciate having a bigger board to play for AA42SE!
I’ve used the HBG units and the extra WOTC sculpts from 1941 to introduce a limited range of new units but within the D6 system and without modifying any OOB values apart from a small number of exceptions. By unit type my new units are:
Land
New units:
Sea
New units:
Modified units:
Air
New units:
Modified units:
In effect I have reverted to the A&A Revised stats for heavy bombers but have kept the cheaper ‘heavy bombers’ from Global as medium bombers but stripped them of the ability to attack ICs.
I have been playing with these units and stats for some time and have not had any balance issues. We just set up as OOB and if people want to play with these they simply purchase them when they want them.
I have a question about your Commonwealth idea. Since you combine the UK Pacific with UK London (to make up for UK London losing Canada and South Africa), do you still keep a Major IC in India or reduce it to a Minor IC?
A lot of people think India having a Major IC is too much, particularly in Global and I tend to agree. However, a Minor IC might be too small. I recently came up with the idea for a Mid-Level IC that can produce 5 units and costs 20 IPCs. I think that would be best suited for India in your idea since the UK Pacific is now combined with UK Europe, now the UK could spend massive amounts in Calcutta and make that area way overpowered.
I think the response to this situation depends on your opinions on how balanced or otherwise Global 1940 is. Clearly a major IC in India + my combined UK economy = potential for stronger builds in India to the advantage of the allies. However, considering the general opinion that the Allies are weaker than the Axis this may be no bad thing. We have kept the major IC in our games so far but I like the mid size IC idea.
I know this topic has been dormant for some time but thought it would be better to say here that I play with heavy tanks on a cost: 7/ att and def: 4 basis but with a move of just 1.
I like to keep house rules ruthlessly simple and eliminating the suggested heavy tank non combat move of 2 also helps to ensure the unit doesn’t become too overpowering. (Also helped by the fact that I also play with heavy artillery on a cost 5, att/def 3 and move 1 basis so both attacker and defender have access to a unit with +1 hit for +1IPC compared to OOB).
To clarify, I have played Global with my oil refineries replacing the National Objectives, but with the recently released by Larry Harris ‘Global 1942’ set up (see various threads in the Global 1940 forum). With the end of this game in site I will start a game of global with the conventional 1940 second edition set up and test the idea in that.
But yes, you summarise the idea well. As it happens in the Global 1942 set up Germany has a starting income of 54, or 60 with two oil refineries already under its control.
We didn’t give ANZAC (or should I say the Commomwealth…) an oil refinery, but it is obviously well placed to threaten the oil refineries in the money islands.
Good point about China - it didn’t affect us in our game of Global 1942 because the Burma Road was broken from R1 but it would make sense to keep that as the sole remaining ‘National Objective’/as a special rule for the already rather unique nation of China.
I’ve been reading these forums for some time but thought I’d share some of my ideas on Global.
I play Global 1940 2nd Ed. and Global 1942 with a more causal group of players and we have limited opportunities to play. Thus, whilst simplfying a complicated game may seem a bit paradoxical it allows us to enjoy the bigger map and extra powers without as many of the downsides in terms of time (much as some enjoy making the game even more complicated as with the Global war variant).
To streamline Global we make two changes:
1. Replace ANZAC with the Commonwealth/eliminate the UK ‘two economies’ rule
The two economies rule for the UK is clearly necessary for balance but somewhat clumsy. Equally, ANZAC is a suboptimal size as a standalone power.
We combine all the Canadian, two South African and original ANZAC territories into the Commonwealth with a start income of 20. Any UK forces in these territories are replaced by the OOB ANZAC sculpts. The Commonwealth operates under a multiple capitals special rule that means it is only defeated if all its original victory cities are captured; otherwise it can continue to collect and spend income.
To compensate for the loss of the Canadian territories all the Pacific UK territories and the income from them are controlled by and accrue to the UK as they would conventionally.
2. All bonus rules replaced with oil refineries
This is clearly the most radical change but we find it works - only tested in Global 1942 so far. The bonus rules were not only slow to administer but also, to us, somewhat economically unrealistic. We introduced oil refineries using the blank factory icons we had left over. Oil refineries are worth +3IPCs each and we start the game with two each for Germany (1x Germany, 1x Romania), Japan (Java, Borneo), UK (North Persia, Persia), USSR (Caucus, Siberia) and six for the USA (Central USA).
These are easier to administer and are good way of boosting the economic value of certain territories in order to add extra incentives. Furthermore, rather than just rewarding specific powers for retaining control of otherwise economically irrelevant territories or their original territories this draws them into conflict fighting over common bonus objectives.
These ideas work for us, but if anyone else out there is also trying to make Global a bit simpler please let me know! And yes, we do also play Revised and 1942 Second Edition for when we want that simpler game but its nice to use the big map too…