This seems like an optimal way to play.
I am interested in the opportunity for turn order revision in Global 1940, and the inclusion of a redesigned Commonwealth player to compliment a unified UK Empire seems ideal. If Australia New Zealand Pacific gets a seperate status, it makes sense for Canada and South Africa to have the same. Dominions
It makes sense to unite India with London, as the jewel in the imperial crown, and the Commonwealth powers would be interesting split across the three theaters, Atlantic, Pacific, and African. They would be more engaging as a stand alone player/nation, and more effective.
I’m also interested in the possibilities of an alternative turn that breaks up the UK/USA turn in the order with 6 major positions (pairing UK with France and Commonwealth, instead of with the US.)
France/UK/Dominions
Germany
Russia
Japan
USA/China (or with China under full US control)
Italy
Or open with Italy instead of end. The exact order is less important to me than the alternating aspect, and the overall flow and transitions between powers. To me a turn order that had the commonwealth and France joined to UK in sequence would be ideal, and would accelerate the feel of the round.
I’m also interested in a version of g40 that does not include National Objectives, but which finds simpler ways to add extra money, such as with a bonus for control of VCs. Under such a scheme the Commonwealth would be well situated with control of 2 VCs at the start. I think a Commonwealth player/nation could be supported in other types of HR games as well.
The territory of New South Wales would be more valuable as a potential target, if it could knock out income in the Atlantic and Africa if taken by Japan. A viable third leg in the Pacific might alter the victory dynamic with Japan in positive ways. As a separate power a Commonwealth player could make the Atlantic more intense, but with less total income and less concentration of power than UK, but still a strong support potential, esp. if joined with UK in the turn order.
Also, has anyone experimented with general restrictions on factories? For example, only Capitals and VCs can support Majors? I am talking about just strict elimination of Majors as a purchase or upgrade option. Such that the only Majors available are the ones on the board at the outset, and having all other factories (and the only ones available for purchase) at Minor status. It might be helpful to fix all factory issue while drafting rules for the inclusion of a Commonwealth faction, and fix the situation around India/Asia at the same time.
I wish G40 used a simpler production system. The jump from 2 ipcs at a minor for 3 units, to 3 ipcs at major for 10 units is so extreme. Its a huge jump in production potential. Also the exceptions on islands. I wish Global used a more traditional system that related more directly to ipc value and provided more flexibility, but then the base values on the 1940 boards would not support this. I was thinking especially if the Major factory could just be removed altogether with some sort of basic universal rule like, Factories on a VC can produce some set amount. Factories anywhere else can only produce units up to the printed IPC value, use minor factories for all these normal factories with no restrictions on where they can be placed.
This would effectively allow you to model the minors on the old system, while not disrupting the production requirements of certain key territories. So for example you could say
Major Factories at a Capital can produce X number of units (cannot be purchased or upgrade, only what is at the start.)
Minor Factories at a VC can produce Y number of units.
Minor Factories (can be purchased), but only produce the number of units printed on the gamemap by IPC, unless on a VC.
Then set the cost of the minor factory in accordance with those conditions. All locations of Major starting factories should be fixed from the outset, and then remove the piece from play. Have only the minors as a purchase option. Make sense?