Small setup modification G40

[Young Grasshopper]

We play 6 player games all the time, and although we rotate nations, the player who gets Italy always lets out a disapointing sigh. So to give Italy a chance, I’m thinking of a house rule change to the setup where I would move the Italian transport sitting with the battleship, into the adjacent sea zone with the sub. That way one sea zone would have 2 Italian transports and the other would have none (just a battleship and cruiser). Of course the argument could be made that the axis have too much an advantage as it is, therefore, I would counter balance this by replacing the American cruiser off Washington with a battleship.

Do you guys think this is a good trade?

[Witt]

Maybe, but the American Battleship might not be in the war for 4 turns, by which time, Italy may have done far too much damage. Transports are like gold. Maybe the British ought to have a DD in the Med to compensate.

Is a tough one to call. You know I believe the problem is an overly powerful, starting ( especially Air wise ) Japan? I believe you have considered weakening them there too.

[Young Grasshopper]

@wittmann:

Maybe, but the American Battleship might not be in the war for 4 turns, by which time, Italy may have done far too much damage. Transports are like gold. Maybe the British ought to have a DD in the Med to compensate.

Is a tough one to call. You know I believe the problem is an overly powerful, starting ( especially Air wise ) Japan? I believe you have considered weakening them there too.

Already using a combined UK Pacific / Anzac nation to slow down Japan… my modivation for the setup change is geared toward Italy not being a SH!T nation to play on its own.

[General Veers]

What about putting the Afrika Corps in Libya to provide some reinforcements already on the ground? Germany could go after Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco to help Italy get the North Africa NO sooner or help reinforce Italy against Egypt. Maybe an infantry, artillery and armor? The UK should definitely get something in return, though.

[CWO Marc]

@Young:

We play 6 player games all the time, and although we rotate nations, the player who gets Italy always lets out a disapointing sigh.

I imagine that the Italian player sighs because, in the OOB six-player Global setup…

Player 1: Germany
Player 2: Japan
Player 3: Italy
Player 4: Soviet Union and France
Player 5: United States and China
Player 6: United Kingdom and ANZAC

…he gets to control the country which (if I recall my source correctly) Gordon Prange once called “the tail of the Axis kite.”  He doesn’t have the advantage of controlling one of the two primary Axis powers (as the German and Japanese players do), and he doesn’t have the advantage of controlling a pair of powers (as all the Allied players do).  So could his job perhaps be made more interesting by giving him an additional thing to control – specifically an Axis Minor force?  The minimal way of doing this, without rewiring the rules too much, would be to treat Finland, Bulgaria and Iraq as Axis minors under Italian control if they’re ever mobilized out of pro-Axis neutral status.  An extension of the concept that would require more in the way of house rules would be to consider Finland, Bulgaria, Slovakia/Hungary, Romania, Iraq and possibly even Siam as forming an Axis Minor block (perhaps right from the start of the game) and placing this block under Italian control.  All those countries were either formal Axis members and/or were Axis co-belligerents to one degree or another.

[Young Grasshopper]

Excellent ideas CWO Marc, I’ll have to chew on that for awhile.

[CWO Marc]

I guess that the most important side-effect of this Italian-controlled Axis Minor concept would be to deprive Germany (and to a much lesser extent Japan) of IPCs and units.  In the three-country version, this would be less of a problem because these IPCs and units…

Finland Pro-Axis neutral.  IPCs: 2.  Standing army: 4.
Bulgaria Pro-Axis neutral.  IPCs: 1.  Standing army: 4.
Iraq Pro-Axis neutral.  IPCs: 2.  Standing army: 3.

…initially aren’t even in play, and aren’t specifically tied to any of the Axis powers.  In the six-country version, however, the resources of the three countries above and of the three countries below…

Slovakia/Hungary German-controlled. IPCs: 3. Setup: 2 infantry, 1 tank, 1 fighter.
Romania German-controlled. IPCs: 3. Setup: 2 infantry, 1 tank.
Siam Japanese-controlled. IPCs: 1. Setup: 2 infantry.

…would be available to Italy and unavailable to her Axis partners (with Germany losing the lion’s share).  I can imagine the German player feeling short-changed by this modification unless he were compensated in some manner, for instance with additional units – which in turn would cause the Allied players to object on the grounds of game balance.  So the six-country version might very well create more problems than it solves.

The three-country version essentially gives extra stuff to Italy without taking anything away from Germany’s initial setup (although it does preclude Germany from walking straight into Bulgaria from German-controlled Romania), so it’s more neutral in its impact as far as Germany is concerned.  The question would therefore be whether the three-country version (giving Italy 5 extra IPCs and 11 extra infantry) is enough of a sweetner to make the Italian player happier with his power assignment.

From a mechanical point of view, I guess those three countries could either simply be considered to be Italian-controlled (stocked with Italian pieces and played as part of Italy’s turn) or they could be considered as an actual “Axis Minor” block that gets its own game turn (say, between ANZAC and France) and is stocked with its own distinctive sculpts (from HBG, for example).  My own preference would be for the second option, since it not only sounds more fun but also because it makes more sense historically, given that the concept of Finland as a part of the Italian empire would sound rather odd.

[arwaker]

What about giving the French IPC to Italy? All formerly French territories go to Italy, independent of who conquers them.
However, one should keep in mind, that any IPC transferred from Germany to Italy is a small disadvantgae for the Axis Power, as Italy is significantly later in the turn oder (especially after UK).

Therefore, another possibility to buff Italy would be to let them have their turn earlier.
For example:
1. Germany
2. Soviet Union
3. United States
4. Italy
5. United Kingdom
6. France
However, as this is a great advantage to the Axis, it should be adjusted by additional british navy in the med.

[toblerone77]

What about an Afrika Korps HR? similar to the lend lease rule in AAE99? Allow the German player to purchase and transfer units to Italy upon agreement of both players if the unit is delivered to original Italian TTs in North Africa.

[CWO Marc]

Here’s an alternate suggestion for giving the Italian player two powers to control to make life more interesting for him.  Find a set of Vichy house rules which are to your liking, in which either all or part of France and its colonial empire goes over to the Vichy side when France falls, and have the Italian player control this Vichy component, with Vichy France being considered an active Axis co-belligerent (rather than mostly sitting on the sidelines, as was the case historically).  In this variant, the Russian player would either not control France at all (if all of France switches to Vichy), or would only control the Free French parts of the former French colonial empire (if some of these terriories choose to join Free France).

[Young Grasshopper]

so which parts would be Vichy, and which would be Colonial Empire?

[CWO Marc]

@Young:

so which parts would be Vichy, and which would be Colonial Empire?

I have a list at home which I researched about a year ago.  I’ll look it up tonight and post it here tomorrow.

[Young Grasshopper]

@CWO:

@Young:

so which parts would be Vichy, and which would be Colonial Empire?

I have a list at home which I researched about a year ago.  I’ll look it up tonight and post it here tomorrow.

Thanks

[CWO Marc]

@Young:

@CWO:

@Young:

so which parts would be Vichy, and which would be Colonial Empire?

I have a list at home which I researched about a year ago.  I’ll look it up tonight and post it here tomorrow.

Thanks

I’ve listed below the A&A 1940 map equivalents of France’s actual territories in WWII, along with notes on whether and at what dates each territory sided with (or was taken over by) Free France.

–-------------------------------------------------

France (the A&A 1940 map territory with this name, not the country as a whole): Occupied by Germany June 1940

Normandy / Bordeaux: Occupied by Germany June 1940

Southern France: Under Vichy control from June 1940 until occupied by Germany and Italy in November 1942

French Indo China: Invaded by Japan September 1940 but remained under nominal Vichy control

New Hebrides: Joined FF June 1940

French Equatorial Africa: Except for Gabon, joined FF June 1940; Gabon seized by FF November 1940

Syria: Occupied by Britain and FF July 1941

Morocco: Occupied by Allies and FF November 1942

Algeria: Occupied by Allies and FF November 1942

French Madagascar: Invaded and occupied by Britain September-November 1942; transferred to FF January 1943

Tunisia: Occupied by Allies and FF May 1943

French Guiana: Joined FF in 1943

French West Africa: Vichy

French Central Africa: Vichy

---

If we make some simplifying assumptions for the purposes of game play, here’s what I think we could reasonably assume happens from a historical point of view (under possible Vichy / Free French house rules) when France falls at the start of the game:

• Germany occupies France (the A&A 1940 map territory with this name, not the country as a whole) and Normandy / Bordeaux.

• Southern France becomes the capital of Vichy France (which could be played by the Italian player)

• Free France (which could be played by the Russian player) gains control of the New Hebrides and of French Equatorial Africa.

• Depending on player preference, French Indo China either continues to be played according to the OOB rules, or is occupied by Japan, or is considered to fall under Vichy control.

• The remaining French territories (Syria, Morocco, Algeria, French Madagascar, Tunisia, French Guiana, French West Africa and French Central Africa) are assumed to fall under Vichy control (played by the Italian player).

[General Veers]

Introducing Vichy France does spice up the game, but all this is doing is allocating funds to a very minor power that could be better used by Germany or Italy.

It’s a tough draw for Italy, the only way they can have some fun is if the German player cooperates by letting Italy take Southern France (prevents blockade losses) and strafes Yugoslavia. Sparing any air in Africa would be icing on the cake.

[CWO Marc]

@General:

It’s a tough draw for Italy, the only way they can have some fun is if the German player cooperates by letting Italy take Southern France (prevents blockade losses) and strafes Yugoslavia.

Fair enough.  Staying within YG’s requirement for a six-player setup, maybe an alternate solution would be this:

Player 1: Germany + Italy
Player 2: Japan
Player 3: Soviet Union
Player 4: United States
Player 5: United Kingdom
Player 6: ANZAC + France + China

[CWO Marc]

Out of curiosity, I checked the above concept against the prescribed Global 1940 order of play.  Organizing the list by order of play, it would read as:

1. Germany – Player 1
2. Soviet Union – Player 3
3. Japan – Player 2
4. United States – Player 4
5. China – Player 6
6. United Kingdom – Player 5
7. Italy – Player 1
8. ANZAC – Player 6
9. France – Player 6

Organizing the list by player number, it would read as:

Player 1: Germany + Italy: plays 1st and 7th
Player 2: Japan: plays 3rd
Player 3: Soviet Union: plays 2nd
Player 4: United States: plays 4th
Player 5: United Kingdom: plays 6th
Player 6: ANZAC + France + China: plays 5th, 8th and 9th

[Young Grasshopper]

Hey CWO Marc,

Great work on the Vichy territories, perhaps you should create a new thread for Vichy house rule guidelines with that post cut and pasted, just so it doesn’t get buried here if someone needs that info.

As for my group games where one player is stuck with Italy… I appreciate the sugestions, however, our group plays with a UK Pacific nation which combines all Pacific British units with ANZAC units giving the capital of Calcutta a combined income of 27 IPC. It has been working great and we have no intensions of going back to regular nations, so giving one player ANZAC / China / France won’t work under our system. We recently had a 7 player game on the weekend which went like this…

Player 1 - Germany
Player 2 -Japan
Player 3 -Italy

Player 4 -Soviet Union
Player 5 -United States
Player 6 -UK Europe / France
Player 7 -UK Pacific / China

However, we like to keep our games to just 6 players with the above 7 player system if we over crowd our games once and awhile. So in a 6 player game, our group looks like this…

Player 1 - Germany
Player 2 -Japan
Player 3 -Italy

Player 4 -Soviet Union/ China
Player 5 -United States / France
Player 6 -UK Europe / UK Pacific

Which still requires someone getting stuck with Italy.

As for Vichy, I think turning all French units on Vichy territories into Italian units is too strong, I would probably remove the French units and place Italian control markers on them when Paris falls.

[General Veers]

One last thing I’ll add is that Italy may not a desirable option but Russia is no picnic. You’re spending the first several hours bending but hoping not to break, and building a TON of infantry in the process. Sure it requires special care to plan defenses and opportune counterattacks, but it’s by far the least sexy (and always has been) option of the Big Three Allies.

What about removing a transport that is guaranteed to be a goner in exchange for an extra infantry and artillery in Tobruk? Basically a shuttle before the game begins.

[Young Grasshopper]

@General:

What about removing a transport that is guaranteed to be a goner in exchange for an extra infantry and artillery in Tobruk? Basically a shuttle before the game begins.

That’s interesting, good idea.