That’s a better idea, especially since Japan is usually somewhat stretched to the limits on their declaration of war on the US.
[Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China
-
@Xlome_00 said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
@CWO-Marc I like this idea of making Soviet Communism operate like a tech roll.
I wonder if a Soviet–Axis agreement (like done against Poland) could be expanded against neutrals and pro-allied neutrals as well…thereby still keeping the Soviets neutral against the main powers, but becoming a more Axis-friendly power who then would not be able to turn on the Axis late game.
Might be a facinating setup for a post-Axis game where the only remaining powers are the Soviets and the neutrals they have conquered, versus the remaning Allies…
The scenario you mention at the end is intriguing, but it deviates so substantially from a standard A&A game that it virtually becomes a new game. A less radical and more historically plausible scenario would be one in which Soviet entry into the war is delayed slightly but not indefinitely. Keep in mind that many of WWII’s “non-aggression pacts” were actually (originally in concept, or eventually in practice, or both) delay-of-aggression pacts which were intended to give Country X a useful amount of breathing time during which it wouldn’t have to worry about Country Y, and potentially giving it time to deal with Country Z in the meantime, after which it could turn around and attack Country Y under more favourable circumstances. That’s not exactly a case of being “friendly”; it’s more a case of cynical opportunism. The Nazi-Soviet Pact and the Japanese-Soviet non-aggression treaty both served their immediate purposes, and they held for as long as it was in interest of both sides to maintain their side of the bargain, but both were ultimately violated when one of the parties decided that it was in their interest to break the deal. I’m reminded of a scene in the original pilot episode 1970s-era Battlestar Galactica series (or in its comic book adaptation) in which the traitor Baltar appears before the Cylon leader with whom he’s been collaborating and accuses him of violating a key provision of their bargain. The leader says, “I am altering the bargain.” Baltar says, “How can one side alter a bargain?” The leader replies, “When there is no other side,” and orders his men to execute Baltar on the spot. (Which they do in the pilot, though the producers altered the scene when the series went into episodic production because Baltar was too good a villain to do without.)
-
@SS-GEN said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
@Xlome_00 said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
@CWO-Marc I like this idea of making Soviet Communism operate like a tech roll.
I wonder if a Soviet–Axis agreement (like done against Poland) could be expanded against neutrals and pro-allied neutrals as well…thereby still keeping the Soviets neutral against the main powers, but becoming a more Axis-friendly power who then would not be able to turn on the Axis late game.
Might be a facinating setup for a post-Axis game where the only remaining powers are the Soviets and the neutrals they have conquered, versus the remaning Allies…
I don’t know if your looking at something like this. I did I think send you my Strict Neutral influence chart.
Anyway I don’t know if this is kinda what you want. Russia can Influence Turkey ( cost 10 icps ), Arabia ( cost 4 icps ) and Afghanistan ( cost 4 icps ) but you need to roll a d20 die and a 4 or less you recieve territory with armies. other wise you got to attack if you want. This works great in my game. Not a huge game changer but another option in game.
Don’t know if CWO was thinking in this area in his suggestion.
Maybe don’t have cost but make a dice roll chart with numbers or make it harder to get like roll 1 d20 and a 2 or less receive ?I didn’t know about your chart, but yes it does sound roughly like what I was suggesting. My suggestion though was just a vague concept; your version is much more fully worked out.
-
@CWO-Marc said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
I didn’t know about your chart, but yes it does sound roughly like what I was suggesting. My suggestion though was just a vague concept; your version is much more fully worked out.
Right. Always great to see your history reports !
-
@SS-GEN Could you post your neutral chart in this thread? i would enjoy looking it over.
-
@carsonbparker said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
@SS-GEN Could you post your neutral chart in this thread? i would enjoy looking it over.
Sure. I’ll post it later today.
-
Strict Neutral influence Chart.pdf
Try this. Some may not agree but what ever. Gives you an idea anyway. Mongolia is Pro-Russia. They just need to move into Mongolia and receive 2 Icps and 2 Inf. In my game. I just have 2 Mongolia territories. But Russia can’t attack Japan with out a penalty. Same for Japan.
I’d make Mongolia in G40 Pro-Russia. Place Mongolians there and move like 8 -10 Russian Inf from 18 there and place in Moscow on setup. You would just need to tweak theses Inf a bit. Throw out the fricken Bid. -
Since most of you never played 1936. The Comintern has it’s own victory points that it can achieve as a victor in itself meaning that you very could have a situation where the Soviets join the Allies and the Allies achieve victory in WWII but USSR and Communist China win the game because the Comintern achieved their victory points before the Democratic Powers (this is how they refer to the Western Alliance) can achieve them. There is also situations where the Western Alliance can aid the Axis powers in the sake of giving themselves victory points to stop the Comintern. The Allies in that game have the most unique rules I’ve ever seen, you may be allies, but you’re also enemies at the same time. Never have I seen a game built for both WWII and the Cold War right from the start of 36. Example, France gets points if the game ends with no territories that borders theirs that are Communist. During the Spanish Civil War, Germany and Italy are aiding Franco, they can Lend-Lease to him at their turns. The problem is that the safest route for Germany to aid is through France. Germany can ask France to move their equipment on their rail lines to get to Spain. France can obviously deny this at no penalty with the exception of the victory point. If the Republicans win in Spain, France faces the problem that Spain is now Communist thus if USSR can’t get Spain to join the Comintern or if Spain just stays neutral. If the Allies win, France now got f*** due to them now bordering a Communist territory. Thus the Allies now have less points for victory and on top of that, the Comintern got points for spreading Communism. So as you can see, this is a case where a future allied power can aid an Axis power to achieve long terms goals with a short term objective. Cleaver right? With G40, I’d try to right house rules for the Comintern that benefits USSR but might piss off everyone else.
-
Ya I got it. Give the territories of Mongolia to Japan with an army but Japan cannot go to war with Russia. Them Mongolia pieces can fight for Japan. Ha
Turkey too maybe
-
@SS-GEN Talk about an alternate history.
-
@Caesar-Seriona Waaaaaay too complicated, but sweet!
-
@taamvan said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
@Caesar-Seriona Waaaaaay too complicated, but sweet!
Just for the fun of it, here’s a jump to the opposite end of the scale (meaning to something very simple). If you look at this section of my custom Global 1940 table, which uses as its default value the original status of China’s territories…
https://www.axisandallies.org/uploads/_imported_attachments/migrated/289190_8 Pacific Left Panel.jpg
…and expand the picture by clicking on it, you’ll notice that Shensi has Communist Chinese marker on it rather than a Nationalist one. That’s roughly the area (today’s Shaanxi) controlled by Mao after he ended up there in 1935 at the end of the Long March. If you want to set up a simple “communist block” in Global 1940 which would be historically credible and which wouldn’t be a major game-changer, make that area (and its sculpts) a ChiCom “micro-player” force controlled by the player who runs the Soviet Union. This would be a little bit like the way in which that the Soviet player already runs France (though on a much smaller scale), and it would also be a little bit like the oddball Flying Tiger unit in Global (a distinct unit with its own rules, and with the strange status of being an American unit that’s technically part of the Chinese Air Force, with the strangeness compounded by the fact that it’s the American player who runs China). I think that, from the point of view of historical accuracy, it should simply be an infantry force, and a fairly small one too; at most, I’d give it an artillery piece as extra firepower.
-
@CWO-Marc Yes, this is a very interesting idea–I’ve referred to turtling the upper leftmost China square as a “Long March Communist Redoubt”, even without using different pieces or any special rules.
And I didn’t mean to sound dismissive of it–i think its a good way to tweak the diplomacy of G40 and make 3 unique new teams. I think the problem (as you mentioned) is what happens when the players decide on their own Molotov Pact and Germany focuses on the allies while Russia builds up. It’d bust the diplomatic playout of G40.
So you dont need to reinvent the wheel, because as always, HBG has created a most comprehensive set of rules from which you can pick and choose. I like the general idea of GW36 it just sounds hopelessly impractical and complex to play. I think some of the ideas could be ported back into G40 much more simply (Winter war, Spanish CW, lend lease), but so do the HBG guys–you can play with as many or as few of their mods as you wish.
-
GW36’s complexity is precisely why I brought this question up as it pertains to G40 because it is too complex to get enough people to approach it. Perhaps incorporating Communist-Friendly neutrals, or create a '36 setup for the G40 board which pulls in some of the diplomatic elements from GW36?
-
@Xlome_00 said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
GW36’s complexity is precisely why I brought this question up as it pertains to G40 because it is too complex to get enough people to approach it. Perhaps incorporating Communist-Friendly neutrals, or create a '36 setup for the G40 board which pulls in some of the diplomatic elements from GW36?
Yes only a few play 36. I thought I saw here on site somebody doing that.
I know a few guys doing 39 for AA50. But would 36 work there. Definitely a lot to play around with. Could have a china word Lord battle and Spain civil war before game. Then just add outcome to 40 ? Maybe -
@Xlome_00 said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
GW36’s complexity is precisely why I brought this question up as it pertains to G40 because it is too complex to get enough people to approach it. Perhaps incorporating Communist-Friendly neutrals, or create a '36 setup for the G40 board which pulls in some of the diplomatic elements from GW36?
The answer would depend on two things: who the house rule is intended for, and what its basic objective is.
In terms of who the house rule is for, the simple case would be if it’s only intended for your own use and/or the use of your gaming group. In such a case, you have unlimited maneuvering room, plus the added advantage that you don’t need to worry about any dissenting viewpoints from anyone. The complicated case would be if it’s intended for use by the wider A&A gaming community. Those are the rocks on which countless house rule proposals have ended up wrecking themselves over the years because – as this discussion thread illustrates – A&A players have diverse opinions on such proposals. Diversity of opinion is a great and desirable thing, since it encourages creativity and individuality, but it tends to make it hard for most house rule proposals to gain broad acceptance; some of them do get widely adopted, but they’re the exceptions.
In terms of what your basic objective is, you’re in the best position to answer that question. If, for example, your basic objective is to play an A&A-type board game in which the Communist Block is a major military power in its own right and controls large areas of the map board right from the start, then you really have only two options: you either have to set the game in the Cold War era rather than WWII, or you have to throw out the history book and create a scenario in which “Communist China” during WWII consisted of the entire country rather than just the small area which Mao actually did control during WWII. If your objective is to borrow concepts from GW36 and import them in simplified form to Global 1940, I can’t offer any useful advice because I’m not familiar with GW36 (or any of its othr incarnations); the board members here who do know that game would be your best sources.
-
@CWO-Marc What do the Communist Chinese start with in your game and do they ever acquire anything more?
-
@carsonbparker said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:
@CWO-Marc What do the Communist Chinese start with in your game and do they ever acquire anything more?
I’ve never worked out any rules for the ChiCom territory on my custom table. My objective in customizing the table was to create (with one exceptions) a “pre-war” picture of the world, whose default values (represented by the custom roundels which are attached to the map under its covering sheet of acrylic) show what the status of each terrritory on the map actually was at the beginning of 1931, before the invasion of Manchuria and the other territorial annexations and conquests engineered by Japan, Italy, Germany in the 1930s. The exception (or at least the only one I remember) is the ChiCom roundel in Shensi, which reflects a date of 1935 rather than 1931. I couldn’t resist putting it there because my sculpt collection (which is the part of A&A that interests me the most) actually include some “Red Chinese” sculpts from the second version of the old A&A Pacific game. (They’re Russian infantry units in terms of design, but they’re made of red plastic and their bases are stamped CH rather than RU. In the first version of Pacific, they were regular-coloured RU-stamped Russian infantry sculpts, just like the ones in the old A&A Europe game.)
-
@Xlome_00 I have tried to do exactly this, with my G37 setup. It is however a “fantasy” setup with a german factory and ships in south america, a “bid-in” spanish civil war system where every nation on earth can dedicate setup units into Spain and then that war is fought before (and if anything survives) during the “main” game,a France that germany can defeat early on if it sends nothing to SCivilwar, but is too weak to kill France on turn 1 if they committ fully to SCW, Winter War rules to encourage non-activation of Finland by Germany, and so forth.
After I’d worked on it for a while, it was overwhelming–not integrating the new ideas but making a balanced setup similar to G1940 2nd ed where there are lots of push-pull choices in the opener that lead to different playouts.
Its just incredibly difficult to make the opener fun, flexible, with lots of good and risky choices…and still have the game continue with some semblance of order after that.
-
The problem with doing Communist China in G40 is that they have a unique and complex situation within the KMT. As I said before, The PLA was organized as the 4th Army under the KMT however Mao’s deal with the KMT was that he will ally with the Chinese under the condition that he operates independent from Chinese Command. So the question is how to you get this to function on a board game. The closest idea I can come up with is that Communist China turn must be done on the same turn as KMT China while being played by another player. But it is seen as a KMT unit. So are there units bought by KMT yet under command of another player?
-
@Caesar-Seriona How about letting the russian player control ComChina and they go right after the KMT move is over? The income part is indeed tricky. Maybe ComChina makes more than 1 ipc if they can take and hold territories from Japan?
Suggested Topics
