@WILD:
Don’t get me wrong YG, I wasn’t suggesting you change your proposal to limit what a “mid major” could produce, or to reduce further what could be built at a minor (although you have done the later). It was more of a reflection of something that could be done strictly as a house-rule tweak to Halifax (sorry for the confusion). BTW I too thought it was pretty cool when Krieghund chimed in, and the 10 IPCs cut off makes a lot of sense to me as well. Hope to see him again, his feed back holds a lot of weight. I would probably steer away from calling it Alpha+4 though if you want a Krieg (or Larry) endorsement. No way they open that up again for G40 lol
No problem… and I may agree with you about the Alpha+4 bit, I may even be treading in copyright waters.
I like the fact that your proposal allows this new CAnzac power to upgrade their starting minor production centers to a mid major for 10 IPCs so they can produce the higher end units.
Not sure, but you may have misread the intended rules which say that all original minor industrial complexes in the initial setup become major factories. Therefore Canada and ANZAC both have major factories that can produce up to 5 units of any type to begin the game.
PS YG just a clarification.
When you describe the individual production centers the last line for a major is a bit confusing.
“May not be purchased, or upgraded”
I know you can’t upgrade a Major to a full fledged IC.
I also know that you can upgrade a minor to a major as long as it is a home territory, and is worth 2 IPCs (like Quebec, Sidney, or S Africa). I assume if UK builds a minor on say Egypt, or Persia, they could also upgrade that minor to a major as well because it is a 2 IPC territory (same for Germany on Romania/Norway or Japan on Korea etc…).
Yes, in order to have a major factory on a territory like Egypt, the UK must first build a minor factory, and then upgrade it to a major during their next turn. I will edit the rules to better clarify this.
Took Krieghund’s name off the credits for now, thought I would ask him first before slapping his name on this as a contributor.
Okay, hold on here. Why are we changing the factory rules?
First we had the following:
Industrial Complexes – Only available on setup (and US entry into the war). Once captured and downgraded to a Minor Factory, can NEVER be an Industrial Complex again. Can NOT be purchased!
Major Factories – All existing Minor ICs at setup are replaced by Major Factories. India’s Major IC is replaced with a Major Factory. Once captured it is downgraded to a Minor Factory. Can NOT be purchased!
Minor Factories – Only purchasable factory available. Can be placed in any territory worth 2 IPCs or more except for islands.
UPGRADES – If an Industrial Complex or Major Factory is captured and reduced to a Minor then retaken, the ORIGINAL owner may upgrade the Minor to a Major Factory for 10 IPCs. This is the ONLY upgrade available.
Now you are saying a country may purchase a Minor Factory, place it, then upgrade it to a Major Factory next round? I am not liking this development. There was supposed to be NO UPGRADES with the exception of ex-ICs and ex-Majors that are recaptured by the original owner. Now you are going to have Major Factories all over the place. I thought these new rules were a way to restrict production in odd places. This will actually boost production.
Also, I saw someone mentioning the US producing units in the Philippines. I thought we were sticking with the “no ICs/factories on islands” rule. Have we done away with that too?
So the only allowable upgrade would be from a minor factory to a major factory, and only if the minor factory in question was already downgraded from a major factory or Industrial Complex, and only if made by the original owner of that territory?.. I’m OK with that. As for ICs on Islands, that suggestion was never entertained. I’m hoping to put a lock on these rules quickly… thanks for your help KNP.
@Young:
@WILD:
I like the fact that your proposal allows this new CAnzac power to upgrade their starting minor production centers to a mid major for 10 IPCs so they can produce the higher end units.
Not sure, but you may have misread the intended rules which say that all original minor industrial complexes in the initial setup become major factories. Therefore Canada and ANZAC both have major factories that can produce up to 5 units of any type to begin the game.
You’re right YG, I misread that part (my bad). I thought the only Major Factory (Mid level) was awarded to India at the start, and the others stayed as Minor Factories that could be upgraded at some point (if on your own soil) if you wanted to make that investment.
I will say that when Krieghund sited the testing minors with a 10 IPC limit, it kinda sounds like they might have been looking at keeping most of the starting minors as minors to restrict certain areas? I don’t want to put words in his mouth though.
Obviously we weren’t privy to what else they looked at, but there must have been some discussions about India’s production abilities in the development phase before they went with 10 units (maybe they looked a a mid level IC and scrapped it?).
To knp7765 about Major factories popping up all over being a concern. Being you can’t upgrade a minor fac to a major fac on foreign soil most powers won’t get more production in remote, or forward bases with the exception of the UK. At least it would take a couple turns to get it to 5 units and again it has to be on your original territory to do so.
My concern is that all the minors just got free increased factory production tech (5 units). Not saying it won’t work, but I wouldn’t close the door on keeping the starting minors as minor factories until you have given it some thought (or tested). By keeping Quebec and Sidney as minor factories the CAnzac power would need to split his income between both sides until he decides to upgrade one or the other. 3 units kinda self limits tossing all income into one theater unless you make an investment (thinking about saving income, or just doing well on one side or the other by taking Brazil or the money islands etc….) It is also intriguing to have what they can build be limited unless they make an investment.
@WILD:
@Young:
@WILD:
My concern is that all the minors just got free increased factory production tech (5 units). Not saying it won’t work, but I wouldn’t close the door on keeping the starting minors as minor factories until you have given it some thought (or tested). By keeping Quebec and Sidney as minor factories the CAnzac power would need to split his income between both sides until he decides to upgrade one or the other. 3 units kinda self limits tossing all income into one theater unless you make an investment (thinking about saving income, or just doing well on one side or the other by taking Brazil or the money islands etc….) It is also intriguing to have what they can build be limited unless they make an investment.
There have been discussions in other threads and more play testing is obviously needed, however, I believe that the Allies are at such a disadvantage (due to many cases of Axis domination even with large bids) that having all minor IC’s begin as major factories is more than acceptable to equalize the balance. Especially if we consider that with Halifax rules, the Allies don’t get any extra units, or extra IPCs to spend (actually some might argue that they have less with the UK and Commonwealth NOs being reduced), in fact the only thing the Allies have been given is the freedom to buy more units in the same places with less restrictions. Weather all this is to little or to strong is still in question, but I kinda like what we got to work with.
@WILD:
My concern is that all the minors just got free increased factory production tech (5 units). Not saying it won’t work, but I wouldn’t close the door on keeping the starting minors as minor factories until you have given it some thought (or tested). By keeping Quebec and Sidney as minor factories the CAnzac power would need to split his income between both sides until he decides to upgrade one or the other. 3 units kinda self limits tossing all income into one theater unless you make an investment (thinking about saving income, or just doing well on one side or the other by taking Brazil or the money islands etc….) It is also intriguing to have what they can build be limited unless they make an investment.
I can understand what you are saying about the Commonwealth pouring too much of their income in either Sydney or Quebec, but really that should be that player’s choice. In most cases, if they concentrate on one side while the other side gets smashed, it will hurt them in the long run.
I am more for giving them Major Factories to start mainly for the limitations placed on Minor Factories – no units over 10 IPCs. Not so worried about the Commonwealth buying battleships or aircraft carriers, but with this limitation they can’t even build cruisers or tactical bombers. Also, I would be more inclined to allow them strategic bombers.
Plus, with Calcutta no longer being a capital, if Germany goes Sealion then Japan might press Sydney really hard. They should be able to produce 5 units per turn without having to upgrade their capital factory for a good defense. Japan may still take Sydney, but it won’t be a cake walk.
Its about to go down! :-D
See the images below…
Pay attention not so much to the order markers or the unit set up, as those are all chaos and unrelated experiments (haha!), but just check the 3 tiered factory scheme green, red, and blue!
These are just the roughest of set up snapshot shops, but maybe it would be cool, once everything is finalized with the standard Halifax rules, to do some sample shots in the lead post. Especially for the production changes, since those are the most important, and the ones that need clarity with nice visually informative snaps.
I favor fixed production for ICs, and Majors, only minors purchasable in green, or something similar. But whatever the ideal production scheme, once its established, take a picture to show exactly what tweaks are involved.
So you know, basically showing how the units are switched out and arranged on the mapboard, how production can be modeled (using markers, or monopoly pieces, or pennies nickels and quarters, or something like that so you can denote ICs, majors, minors.) I find the visual can be helpful for showing the aesthetics and advantages of the adjustment.
Like we could do factory snaps showing the values, canada+anzac shots, UK+UK pacific shots with India made clear, show the income with battlebucks, the turn order with control markers, show the distribution of all ICs and Majors etc, and make a little photo guide help aid in the set up like that.
In these snaps our Canadian units got a little knocked around. I let my buddy try them out and he was pretty into it. I saved a couple snaps showing how we stacked the factories in colors. Tiny earthquakes (following the larger one) shook some stuff around, I just noticed in the snaps for factories, as we tried to lay it out on card tables. Anyway… I didn’t have monopoly pieces on hand at my friends, but we used these flag markers as placeholders. I have to double check his set up, because we were just playing around with ideas, and things got knocked as always, but my friend Tony and I are setting up for the showdown! I wanted to lay out the most basic set up for my friend to see if he liked our approach, e.g. incorporating Canada into the action, single UK, and new production system.) I have adopted a 3 tiered colored scheme as suggested elsewhere, shown here flags and chips below up to the operation value, with the factory unit alongside and dice values for reference.
Some visuals to make clearer some of the core ideas…
I also have some ideas about how 1940 could be played, that would compliment the basic thrust of the Halifax rules. Not necessary for them, but things that could be added around them to simplify or take the game in other interesting direction. The unit placements are a bit off, since I was paying more attention to Germany and Axis spreads, but I like the basic theme it builds off to have Canada in the same faction with Anzac, and UK brought together. I also just like the way it looks with ICs, and Majors and Minors having the color thing nailed. Blue for 10 will go next time, but just working with the stuff we had on hand red and green chips with the standards :)
Industrial Complexes – Only available on setup (and US entry into the war). Once captured and downgraded to a Minor Factory, can NEVER be an Industrial Complex again. Can NOT be purchased!
Major Factories – All existing Minor ICs at setup are replaced by Major Factories. India’s Major IC is replaced with a Major Factory. Once captured it is downgraded to a Minor Factory. Can NOT be purchased!
Minor Factories – Only purchasable factory available. Can be placed in any territory worth 2 IPCs or more except for islands.
UPGRADES – If an Industrial Complex or Major Factory is captured and reduced to a Minor then retaken, the ORIGINAL owner may upgrade the Minor to a Major Factory for 10 IPCs. This is the ONLY upgrade available.
Yeah, I don’t see a strong reason to restrict the unit types that can be produced at majors, except for the general cap on total placement. I favor ICs and Majors working basically like the familiar factories of other boards. The only distinction being the numbers cap and operation level (at 5 and 10 units total). No purchase, no upgrade. If there is a restriction on unit type that can be placed at a factory, then I’d leave it just for the Minors. Like a cap by unit cost at 10 as suggested elsewhere. Basically I think it would probably be easiest to adopt if the only factory that has specific rules is the minor. All the others are just there from the outset (with the exception of the IC/Major getting captured and demoted thing.) It seems like its easiest to fix the ICs and Major at the outset, so the only stuff that would change is if a Major factory gets knocked down to a minor, or a new minor is purchased, or if you like the DoW thing with USA getting the upgrade. I prefer a scenerio where USA likewise just starts with whatever ICs its going to end up having, but I also favor ditching the DoW, so people may not want to go as extreme as me hehe. But basically keep it simple with all the switches at the outset. I like ICs and Major, not available as upgrades, so you don’t have to deal with the idea of upgrading, just downgrading. Whatever the choice, once fixed, I say take some pics to show it
ps. This is not necessarily for the Halifax rules, but in our expanded games my friends are very interested in the potential adaptations of some of these new principles outlined in the thread above. Specifically how they might also be used in conjunction with other tweaks, to support a Variable start to the turn order on a G40 board, as well as a total war (no DoW) start. Using the player/nation structure, the economy, and factory systems outlined above, but also using Turn order adjustments (within a set turn order or “sequence of nations”), and with matching paired income bonuses at the outset as the balancing mechanism. The idea is a large ascending or descending bonus to starting income, depending on which nation wins the roll, for a randomized beginning to the game over the bid. Basically the same sorts of rules we use for AA50 variable start, but adapted to a 1940 set up. I mention this here, only because I wanted to show one of the cool features of including the Dominions. In such a variable you can create 6 positions, where Allies are paired equally. The exact sequence of nations, the bonus structure, and which Minor Allied nation should be attached to which Major Allied nation are all points still up for debate, but this is the goal I have been pursuing for a long time… A variable start to an A&A game to replace the bid. Right now there are still many features of this to be worked out. But with the Canadians included in the commonwealth spread I think there are several potential positions that can be explored… For example in Variable, the grouping on major-nations/minors-nations could have Russia/China, UK/France, USA/Commonwealth, because then you’d have the advantage of pieces in proximity (more concentrated for ease of the Allied player seating and piece movement.) Or it could have Russia/France, UK/Commonwealth, USA/China which gives a coordinated feel. Or it could have Russia/Commonwealth, UK/China, USA/France which spreads each ally (in a 3 man) out across the globe and gives everyone a navy to mess around with. How exactly to split the major-nations with the minor-nations is the current subject that my game group is playing around with, and whether to make this a randomized component of the allied sequence or a set one. More ideas along these lines in future separate threads. We are most interested in a variable set up that begins Total War, without the DoW. We would like to stick as much as possible to boxed set up cards, for ease of implementation, but instead use turn order and starting income (cash bonus) adjustments to balance, rather than adjusting unit positions via bids and the like.
But anyway…
I bring it up here just to say that we are fully on board with the production and set up changes that bring Canada into it, fix the production, and join the UK and UK pacific into a single spread. This will be the basis of any other rules we work on going forward. Thanks again to everyone who has been working on this stuff. I think its all great :-D
pps. in the snaps above my stuff in Ontario and Quebec got all knocked around while switching out lime green Brits from revised and cAnzacs to play ahah. But you get the general idea we tried for in the end. Anyway, in our set up and tweak session I was a bit more focused on G with the variable. But we both were having fun trying to see how to get the Commonwealth up into the fight. We settled on regular Anzac units for Canada, (rather than confusing the situation with the lime greens) but I did find that I kind of like the lime green potentially for China as the fighter looks a bit closer than using a US model, and the artillery seemed to match up alright. Anyway, this shot was from lining things up trying to decide heheh, lots of things got shifted around from Quebec and Ontario and Nova Scotia as we were looking at the set up, so these snaps don’t show the fighters in the right place, but the other ones were blurry. In any case, it was fun just to set up! More thoughts in the days to come :)
Back to Commonwealth Ideas…
Also, again not necessary for Halifax, but another simple rule I hit on was:
Universal rule: All units listed in land territories for the starting unit set up, must match the National roundel marker of the territory they are in. (Basically to get rid of all co-located units at the beginning of play, something which introduces confusion I find.) This would effectively mean that step one is…
1. Place all roundel adjustments: in this case Canzac roundel control markers on W. Canada (and Newfoundland if desired) Halifax Rules!
2. switch out co-located units on the gamemap, so they all always match the territory’s national roundel control marker.
In this case all British units in Canada become Canzac. Which is desirable, but also with this simple rule, the Canzac unit in Malaya, and the French units in London would become British. This could perhaps be used in lieu of any need for Allied bid adjustment, since Britain would gain back some of the units it loses to Canzac. And the wording of the rule is universal, thus easy to implement! No need for co-location of different nations at the outset.
I call this “control marker” unit replacement. Basically the unit set up could stay exactly the same as printed on the OOB unit box set up chart, the only new information you need is which territory roundel changes to make, and the unit changes plug in automatically.
Using this mechanism you can eliminate all co-located units from the set up! Co-located units are confusing at the beginning anyway, and this workaround gets you a balance that strikes much closer to what UK would likely need. Because the rule is universal, you could do the same thing for China if desired. You don’t have to, but if you wanted, you change all China’s territories to an American roundel, all units immediately become American (this might weaken the Allies in the long run, as a counterbalance if needed, since they wouldn’t have as much inf wall potential). Or you could do it for France or on any territory that you wanted to collapse or change in terms of possession in different types of games. The numbers of units and unit types within the territory stay the same as those printed on the set up chart for that territory, but the roundel change means “replace units to the nation of the Roundel.”
I think that would be nice as a universal rule, because it makes everything else simpler. First place Control Marker tweak (alter possession as needed for the given scenario), then switch out units to match the roundel change. Make sense?
One thing I like to avoid, if it can be avoided, is a change to the Boxed set up cards. Pre-placement bids are one example of changes to the Box set up, but also hard set up adjustments. These introduce confusion because the set up doesn’t match the box. But with the control marker mechanic for unit possession, you could include Canada easily. All units at the start of play (the ones written down on the set up unit boxes), are replaced by units matching the national roundel of that territory (in the set up.)
So for our purposes Canadian roundels are considered Anzac (Canzac) all units there become Commonwealth. The British would get an extra fighter and 2 inf in UK, along with the extra dude in Malaya to aid the Indian defense (the units change to Brits to match the roundel). This makes up for not having the Brit units in Canada, but also removes a strong need for an Ontario fighter in the Atlantic, since UK would have one in London for the Battle of Britain right from the start. Canada could buy more air if desired at the Major factory. UK gaining the units in Malaya and UK just makes for a simpler cleaner look, or in the case of the latest manual they could get the extra dude in Egypt too for g40. With one clean move, you get Canada in, and you get all co-located units out. Simplifies everything at a go.
Sea Zones don’t count for this, because they don’t have national control markers.
The advantage to the universal rule, is that you can make set up adjustments with control markers, without breaking the unit totals/types. Everything stays true to the boxed set up, for ease of use and wider adoptability.
Also, another smaller earthquake aftershock in the Bay Area just now!!! Once more I take this as a sign!
By the way, are the plastic flag markers from Twilight Imperium Third Edition?
Yup :-D My friends and I have also been using the Black flags to signify (oil/resources) in AA50, an idea we nixed to add direct IPCs values to certain territories of the gamemap in various scenarios, altering income but without effecting production.
But back to the basic G40 Halifax Factory rules outlined in the thread above, I suppose for ease of integration, it is always best when you can do all this stuff just with the materials in the box. In that case I would suggest the following… In its most basic formulation what’d you need is just the stuff you already have
Industrial Complex = Factory 10 chips
Major Factory = the normal Factory 3 chips, but resting on a Coin! (signifies +2 in production value, for 5 total)
Minor Factory = the Factory 3 chips
Everything else you need is already in the box. And by using the Commonwealth as an opportunity to simplify and balance at the same time, its pretty much a win win by my reckoning.
I hope it takes off like a rocket :-D
ps. India snap for clarity below…
With Red major Factory for unified UK at the start, and the Lime Tiger in China (using an old Brit spitfire from revised. We settled on Lime for China instead of Commonwealth since it seemed to match the color reasonably well. And the lime fighter looks a bit more like the iconic Flying Tigers to me than the olive lightning does haha!) But if you don’t have revised you can just use standard American sculpts as desired…
Finally as an aside, I favor either a normal Capital in Sydney with the normal mechanics, (as a bait for Japan, since unlike Ottawa, Sydney is contested) Or perhaps, JUST MAYBE, no capital cash mechanic in play at all for any of the minor Allied Nations!
So essentially China, Canzac, and France with no Capital cash dynamic. That might alter the basic thrust of the whole game in favor of balance Allies vs Axis (would effect how G manages the fall of France too, perhaps to the benefit of the gameplay). It would seem preferable to me if all players behaved in roughly the same way, if such a thing is possible. It annoys me for example, how china always has separate rules. Something like this would allow for the 3 normal Allied players (Russia, UK, USA) to retain the capital cash dynamic, while the 3 minor Allied players (France, Canzac, China) have no capital cash dynamic. That way they are all vaguely consistent in terms of their rules. Obviously China is problematic no matter what, since it has no factories and uses its own weird infantry spamming production scheme. I’m not sure which I prefer, a normal capital or no capital at all for the Commonwealth Dominions. But I definitely prefer either of those options to a scenario with Dual capitals, as I find those introduce way more confusion than they’re worth. Part of the reason to merge UK and UK pacific, is to avoid having a weird dual capital faction. So I like normal in Sydney or none for the Canzac faction. What sort of Capital scheme do you guys prefer?
Black_Elk,
Thanks for that awesome analysis and for including pics. I read over everything and it doesn’t seem that there is any need to change the core rules, although you did remind me to include the US upgrades when they DOW. Like I mentioned before, people will always house rule house rules, I myself have a pretty elaborate house rule project going called Delta. However, I think it is important to have one simple universal game mechanic that can balance the two sides, and provide a more fun game as well.
I agree with you that the game does come with everything needed to play Halifax Rules, use the alternate English roundel to track the Commonwealth income, use ANZAC gray units in Canada, and a dime, nickel, quarter can be used for factories. However, I also like the room for peice sculpt creativity for customizers and enthusiasts.
Your idea is very good but in the British Commonwealth south africa is in too if you modifie your map the British Commonwealth have 25 IPC and the UK IPC.
just a little idea.
@Young:
However, I also like the room for peice sculpt creativity for customizers and enthusiasts.
True dat! This is awesome and I am definitely interested.
A couple very minor comments, more cosmetic than anything else, for Black_Elk:
If I were using colored pieces to represent minor and major factories and ICs, with the colors you have used, I would personally configure as…
Minor Factory = RED
Major Factory = Green
Ind. Complex = BLUE
This just seems more color-logical from a fewer = worse and more = better perspective. It is sort of a universally understood thing. However, I suppose it really doesn’t matter.
Secondly, why not buy some HBG pieces to match all your colors and unit types… if that is important?
@Young:
However, I also like the room for peice sculpt creativity for customizers and enthusiasts.
True dat! This is awesome and I am definitely interested.
A couple very minor comments, more cosmetic than anything else, for Black_Elk:
If I were using colored pieces to represent minor and major factories and ICs, with the colors you have used, I would personally configure as…
Minor Factory = RED
Major Factory = Green
Ind. Complex = BLUEThis just seems more color-logical from a fewer = worse and more = better perspective. It is sort of a universally understood thing. However, I suppose it really doesn’t matter.
Secondly, why not buy some HBG pieces to match all your colors and unit types… if that is important?
To no fault of your own LHoff, you may have missed the point of the color scheme, all my G40 components are from 1st Edition… so I almost missed it as well. In 2nd Edition G40, there are green chips that represent 3 units, therefore, a minor factory that produces a maximum of 3 units should be green for association purposes (it also helps that a small monopoly house is green). When it comes to Ind. Complexes being blue… that comes from the old A&A paper money color scheme (blue for 10/red for 5/green for 1) and it also helps that a slightly larger monopoly hotel token is red.
Exactly! The reason I like it is because it models the chips that come with the box. Green for 3, Red for 5. The blue is basically just a suggestion, because in 1914 there are blue chips that could also be used. I tried to describe the novelty in this image from the previous page. You can see that the blue chip is not exactly necessary (it could be anything, or any color for 10, even the factory chips that come in the box.) I tried to show how, if you wanted you could prechip the factories, and count down in reverse instead of adding chips if you wanted. Or just set them off to the side somewhere so you know the values of each.
Here the Minors are chipped with a green because they are worth 3.
The Majors are chipped with a red because they’re worth 5.
And the Industrial Complex sits atop 2 greys, a green and a red because they are worth 10.
It was just a shorthand for reference, but you could use any system you want to represent the 3 factory types, so long as it was consistent, and all your players know what’s worth what :)
Your idea is very good but in the British Commonwealth south africa is in too if you modifie your map the British Commonwealth have 25 IPC and the UK IPC.
just a little idea.
Yes, South Africa was indeed a Commonweath dominion, and I completly understand that some think that South Africa should be included in this new Commonwealth idea. However, as far as game play goes… I believe stripping the UK of that income would hurt the Allies more than help. So when it comes to this new nation, I think it’s more than acceptable to only identifiy the most significant Commonwealth dominions as separate from the UK, and those which territories are clearly separated with their own roundels printed on the game map.
When I asked my favorite A&A.org historian CWO Marc this question, this was his response…
_Hi YG,
This is just a quick response, but the answer is roughly as follows.
The Canadian contribution to WWII was quite sizable. To give just a few examples, just in terms of military units:
So, Canada was definitely an important second-tier power.
Of the other Commonwealth Dominions, Australia would come first in importance. About 400,000 of its 700,000 soldiers served outside Australia during the war. Its navy started out small, but ended the war in 5th place globally. South Africa would be next, I think: 334,000 South Africans served in support of the Allies abroad. I don’t think its navy was very extensive. New Zealand would be in fourth place among the Dominions, with 140,000 New Zealand personnel serving overseas for the Allied war effort and a very small navy – but in A&A Global 1940, remember that it’s paired with Australia to form ANZAC. Honourable mention must be given to Newfoundland, which I think contributed quite a good number of troops proportional to its small population size; they fought as part of Canadian or British units, I think.
India is a special case. It wasn’t a Commonwealth Dominion, it was a British imperial possession – basically, a colony – so it’s not in the same political category as the Dominions. Its WWII effort, however, was enormous: it contributed 2,500,000 – two and a half million! – troops to the Allied cause, and it manufacturing output was huge too._
@Young:
To no fault of your own LHoff, you may have missed the point of the color scheme, all my G40 components are from 1st Edition… so I almost missed it as well. In 2nd Edition G40, there are green chips that represent 3 units, therefore, a minor factory that produces a maximum of 3 units should be green for association purposes (it also helps that a small monopoly house is green). When it comes to Ind. Complexes being blue… that comes from the old A&A paper money color scheme (blue for 10/red for 5/green for 1) and it also helps that a slightly larger monopoly hotel token is red.
Ahhhhh… I see! I have played with 2nd Edition rules, but have not bought the 2nd Ed. game. Now I understand. Good system then.
Just wanted to say thanks to YG and knp for responding to my concerns about production (all minor IC’s upgraded to major factories at set-up, and able to produce 5 units w/o restrictions). Looks like you guys have a good plan to run with, but are willing to revisit it later if need be (and like you said, there are always house rules).
I have to applaud you for bringing Canada into the fold, this has been on players minds from the early days of G40 especially our Canadian friends to north (well because I live in a northern Detroit suburb, I guess it could be my friends to the south lol). I’m really exited to try it out, and hopefully I can get a game together in the next 10 days or so to give you some feedback.
One thing I was wondering about with this version (in the games you have played) does England still feel threaten by Sea lion? Alpha+3 gave England quite a def boost (talking mostly about AA guns that were added, and taking a hit now).
*UK has a bit more income to start (at the expense of India of course)
*Canada can now better support England if the CAnzac power wants to
*If Germany buys fleet G1, does London still feel as threatened.
*Can UK pull off Taranto, and still max def London because there is more income/resources available
Maybe look at sliding an AA gun across the pond to Quebec?
Just babbling here……
It is common for a power like the US to spend nearly all income in one theater for 2-3-turns to gain an edge, then switch to the other side (that would be playing mostly defense). Have you guys seen this with UK, and CAnzac as well w/all three powers loading up? Much would depend on Japans play.
…I would also think Brazil would be a good grab for Canada. I have been experimenting with an allied Neutral Crush as of late in the G42 version, and my Anzac hit S America taking Chile, then Argentina. Hmmm…wonder how Halifax would work w/G42?
