Yeah, I wish they put the couple of rules not in both books in the global section at the back.
Europe has the straits rule.
Pacific has Kamikaze and China rules.
If you’re aware of that, it isn’t too much of a problem.
Praise for Global (alpha 3.9 version)
-
Many of us were thrilled by the historical realism achieved by the Anniversary version compared to prior versions. But in the realism department, Global makes Anniversary seem like child’s play. For a history buff, this is the ultimate World War II strategy game.
That said, it’s great for geography buffs too! The map actually looks alot like the planet Earth. It’s no longer possible for a bomber on Egypt to attack sea zones around Japan….in fact it barely makes it to India! Flying a fighter from India to Russia takes 2 turns! One nagging flaw shared by prior A&A games–the Archangel shuck–has been done away with. Nor is it possible to fly a fighter directly from London to Russian territory, much less Moscow!
It’s early days yet, but experiences so far show a game that’s well-balanced. Sea Lion is viable as is Barbarossa. The United States must fight on both fronts. And neither Aussie nor India are easily taken if the Allies are playing smart. China is also a real power that doesn’t collapse without a stiff fight.
Naval bases and air bases add significantly to realism. They ensure a fight for strategic naval locations (like Hawaii, Philiphines, Carolines, Gibraltar). With the range provided by air bases, air retains its dominance from the Anniversary rules. But air and navy are better balanced by the ability to defend fleets with scrambled aircraft.
The only significant flaw I notice is all the new rules along with special rules for historicity make for a very steep learning curve. So learning requires losing…alot. Beyond that, it will be interesting to see how much strategic variety there will be when a game/map is so devoted to historical realism.
Whatever the flaws, the awesomeness of the game makes up for it!
Big ups to Larry Harris, Krieghund, and everyone else involved in inventing this masterpiece. And big ups to Veqyrn and Bung for creating a superb TripleA module!
-
Well said!
as far as losing goes it’s almost impossible not to make a mistake during a long or not so long game
if you get diced look at it as a challenge like the brits were faced with early in the war
it just provides different challenges
the longer you play the better chance for the dice to go your way
-
Thanks. We’re glad you’re enjoying it!
-
yeah remembering all the rules took me awhile. I still have a bunch of things i got to look up in the faq… some weird stuff happens sometimes.
-
I think Alpha 3.9 favors to the Axis. USSR is, was and apparently will be too weak to stop an Axis crush….
-
Have you tried massive allied air reinforcement ?
-
-
Russia may fall, but that does not mean game over necessarily.
Egypt is a ways off. sometimes you can get france back in the game and hold it.
sometimes UK pac /china has japan under control. UK pac making 20-30 and sending stuff toward egypt.
etc etc
~the massive air reinforcement usually comes from uk. usually 4 air pieces. sometimes I see french fighter early on fly to scotland->nene->russia.
ANZAC fighters sometimes i see those in the mix.
-
Yeah, I’ve seen the rush of ftrs to RUS, but still won’t stop the crush.
As I see it the allies have 2 options when the Axis go for the Russia crush
1, They try to stop it by going all out against Germany and Italy, basically a KGF. But this of course means leaving Japan to expand like cancer and probably win the game. You can hope that you can roll germany back, secure Russia in time to reinforce India, but it’s not likely. It’s really is too easy for Germany to defend itself and still menace the Allies.
2, The second option it to do a KJF and hope you can reroute to Europe in time thwart a German victory. Of course the key is to stop Italy early on from getting Egy so if the USSR falls you can check the Axis win in the middles east.
All that being said, I admit when I say Russia Crush, I mean a true crush with Germany pushing mass amounts of armor and infantry into the USSR, using Italians to open the way. Japan has also got to attack round 1 and push into Siberia regardless of the non-aggression treaty. Basically move so hard and fast that the Allies can’t put together a coherent plan until too late. I think a lot of players shy away from committing so much to one objective and allow themselves to get hamstrung as the Axis…
-
I don’t know, I just like to focus on japan NOs. If I push north into ruskie territory, uk pacific will start sending mechanized inf to help russia.
I rather just go for my own victory in pacific. While germany/italy goes for theirs.
Also as russia I don’t give italy anything to kill, little blockers are pointless. I have either one or two stacks and I only fight the fights I can win, russia don’t fall till round 7-10 if it happens.
Russia usually don’t die if UK pacific is sending mech infantry to help out and do annoying volgograd stuff.
plus if russia has iraq/persia. that is +7 a round… very usefull in the later rounds when russia is starving for cash…I like to consistently grow as japan. Once Japan achieves india, he gets USA income typically and only needs hawaii to win the game… at that point usa is full pacific… only a matter of time for germany.
I can see the benefits of moving into amur no matter what round 1.
It is just not as fun though, because the units up there round away till your fighters are no longer in range, then they just block you like a wall.
then uk pacific and anzacs are doing stuff down below. messin with my money islands.
Axis is fairly easy to win with though. That’s why people bid for allies, I refuse to take allies below 5. REFUSE.
-
the full germany push to russia is generally the way to go.
I just am skeptical of japan doing early russia play, because the income japan gets out of it is small and he gives up much in his setup. Makes dealing with china / uk pac / anzac / usa really hard especially at a low income.
I am a full believer in a strong japan going for his objectives. It makes allies commit more and makes allies have less income as a whole
Suggested Topics
