Newest Setup by Larry

[kcdzim]

@calvinhobbesliker:

@kcdzim:

@94Canuck:

Well it’s the end of round 3 with the new set up.  It has been a drastically different game than the last.  As it sits right now:

Of main concern is the Russian East front, that has been paired with USA Bombers, and land supplied by a Minor IC in Alaska that has shipped tanks over.  Japan is not looking good, I really need better strategies for them.

USA:  Just got the cash bump.  Atlantic is not a threat right now.  Pacific has a weak fleet, but some menacing units in Russia.

I just want to make sure you realize that prior to war the US cannot place tanks or bombers in russian territories.  And if Russia isn’t at war with Japan (doesn’t sound like it) I’m fairly certain the rule implication is that even if the US is at war, it cannot share a space with Russia (on the Pacific side) as it’s considered “neutral” as Russian diplomatic rules are split between the theaters.

Unless the US is at war with japan, they can’t land planes in Siberian territory

That’s exactly what I said.  But it’s just as dependent on Russia being at war with Japan, as otherwise it’s still considered “neutral” and the US still couldn’t land there even if it was already at war with Japan.

[Krieghund]

@mantlefan:

Do Airbases, Naval Bases, and IC’s still get their built-in aa shots?

Yes.

[Fishmoto37]

OK, no sub sneak attack at transports. I am totally confused as to what that means. Does the sub still make a normal attack on lone transports? How many times can it fire at defenseless transports?

[knp7765]

I still STRONGLY disagree with the submarine rule.  If you have a submarine and along comes some enemy transports with no warship to harass you, of course you are going to take a shot at them.  First of all, it’s only one shot per submarine and that shot is at 2 or less so it’s not like it is a sure thing anyway.  Secondly, it would teach players that you don’t send out your transports without some protection.  Just a single warship prevents the subs sneak attack and they can be on their merry way.

I can’t beleive he brought this rule back from Alpha +.  He should have left it there.

[94Canuck]

@kcdzim:

@94Canuck:

Well it’s the end of round 3 with the new set up.  It has been a drastically different game than the last.  As it sits right now:

Of main concern is the Russian East front, that has been paired with USA Bombers, and land supplied by a Minor IC in Alaska that has shipped tanks over.  Japan is not looking good, I really need better strategies for them.

USA:  Just got the cash bump.  Atlantic is not a threat right now.  Pacific has a weak fleet, but some menacing units in Russia.

I just want to make sure you realize that prior to war the US cannot place tanks or bombers in russian territories.  And if Russia isn’t at war with Japan (doesn’t sound like it) I’m fairly certain the rule implication is that even if the US is at war, it cannot share a space with Russia (on the Pacific side) as it’s considered “neutral” as Russian diplomatic rules are split between the theaters.

When the USA player did that we both wondered if that was alright given that Russia was neutral at the time.  Japan and Russia made a no combat pact until turn 4.  We checked the rule book and didnt’ find a for sure answer.

Have to deal with it now I guess but for next game.  The good thing is when the USA player attempts an invasion next turn he will likely get stuffed.  He’ll have only 1 transport offloading after I sink his ones incoming with fighters from Japan.  Then it’s an offshore bombardment of only 1 shell, 6 bombers, 4 fighters, and 1 tac.  After AA fire and he lands there will be 6 inf, 6 Tanks, 2 Fights, 2 Tac fighters to push him back which shouldn’t be an issue.

[Napoleon]

Im playin the 28th, wich should i play the newest or the one on page 1?

[Krieghund]

@Fishmoto37:

OK, no sub sneak attack at transports. I am totally confused as to what that means. Does the sub still make a normal attack on lone transports? How many times can it fire at defenseless transports?

Subs still attack and defend normally.  The “sneak attack” referred to here is explained on page 30 of the Europe Rulebook under the Doesn’t Block Enemy Movement ability of subs.

@94Canuck:

When the USA player did that we both wondered if that was alright given that Russia was neutral at the time.  Japan and Russia made a no combat pact until turn 4.  We checked the rule book and didnt’ find a for sure answer.

See the sidebar on page 15 of the Europe Rulebook (Powers That Begin the Game Neutral).  This has also been modified as concerns the USSR by the Alpha+.1 rules as kcdzim indicated.

@Napoleon:

Im playin the 28th, wich should i play the newest or the one on page 1?

You should use the newest one.

[fanofbond]

I’m very exited by the Malta additions

[Mountaineer]

I just played a long game of G40 as UK/Russia using the 12/15 Alpha+. Went well. Germany tried to attack Russia on G1 but did not set up very successfully for it. They did not transfer many units east, did not rotate their fighters east or south to defend Italy. Overall, I cannot tell if the game is balanced yet or not until I play another time or two this week, but I like it.

I want to critique the USSR set up some because it is historically incorrect. Stalin had made the choice to defend heavily in the south–the Ukraine. However, given the start date for G40, USSR would still be shifting units in 1940 after the disaster against Finnland, and still be reorganizing from the purges and changes in force structure. So you could argue that you still have time for that shift.

I would like to see a NB in Scotland and an AB in Norway. After all, the UK did have large fleet locations in the north and the whole reason Germany invaded Norway was for the strategic airbase location of Stavanger (and to secure the northern resources of course).

My German partner was really upset when 1 USSR sub sank 3 German ones, given the advantage of the roll and the sneak attack. It did seem rediculous and highly unlikely given how few subs actually attacked one another in WWII. I don’t know how to correct it, especially since it was really more a case of rotten luck with dice for him :) I would not change the way subs work or the dice rolls needed.

I do think the USSR is overpowering for the Germans to grapple with. I would like to see fewer ground units, and maybe a bit more air/tank. 22 JUNE 1941 USSR to German ratio in men on the front was 1:1.14 and in aircraft and tanks there was nearly an even match in numbers. Germany was never able to have a higher ratio again but they need it that first crucial turn when they attack or they will never have a chance.

Otherwise, great game. I look forward to the day when Larry and the boys wrap up the game changes.

[calvinhobbesliker]

If Subs attack subs, the defending subs can submerge unless the attackers have a destroyer

[Mountaineer]

He considered submerging, but they were sitting with 2 transports. My opponent made several mistakes, but they were most likely because he was still dealing with the new rules. I missed an opportunity to scramble early in the game myself. I just look forward to playing on the Axis side to see if I can win it.

[Mountaineer]

The real issue for my opponent was the “reality” of sub vs sub conflict. We are not sure it ever really happened in history.

Calvin, since you seem to be an official for Larry on the game, what do you think of adding the NB in Scotland and AB in Norway? I know Stavanger was the only concrete runway in Norway and it was not only heavily defended, but had air and naval radar for German early warning. It was a point of departure for German raids into Naval bases in North England and for defending the Baltic.

Also, has anyone looked at the force ratios for Germany and USSR in 1940? I know USSR tanks and fighters were in greater numbers than what is depicted in the game. I also know that it is tough to balance a game for historical accuracy and playability.

[calvinhobbesliker]

I’m not an official for Larry; I just know the rules really well.

An AB on Norway would help with Barbarossa; however, I see no point for a Naval base in Scotalnd, since the UK usually does not have ships there that move 3 spaces. An AB is better so the ships that start in Z111 can be defended.

[calvinhobbesliker]

The problem with using historical ration is that most of Russia’s air force was destroyed on the front; this obviously won’t happen in the board game. Thus, they gave Russia a small air force and balanced it by adding ground forces

[fanofbond]

I’m playing this newest set now and have rules question.  I don’t think this can happen but can’t find where it says this isn’t allowed. Uk units landing in Russia while Russia is neutral.

[calvinhobbesliker]

@fanofbond:

I’m playing this newest set now and have rules question.  I don’t think this can happen but can’t find where it says this isn’t allowed. Uk units landing in Russia while Russia is neutral.

Page 15 of E40 rulebook, in the blue box “Powers that Begin the Game Neutral” under movement:
“…nor can another power move land or air units into its(a neutral power) territories…”

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Think of the lack of Russian planes as a representation of how poor use Russian Generals got out of their planes.

To be numerically correct on the eastern front the Germans wouldnt stand a chance with equal players. 1941 Russia suffered greatly from the purges and from……well the France problem, having the right equipment but not knowing how to use it in battle.

[Metaxas]

Hey everyone.

Can someone kindly direct me to a link of the most recent Alpha+.1 rules and setup? The last one I was aware of was the December 15th edition on ~page 50 of the thread on Larry’s site. My group is getting together tomorrow and we do not get to play as often as we would like, so I’d like to show up with the rules in hand so as to not waste a second of gaming.

Thanks.

[Mountaineer]

Use what is posted on the first page of this string. I also took some work others had done and updated these 3 attachments to match.

Alpha+ 12_15_10.pdf

[Mountaineer]

The 3d one.

alpha + set up.pdf