Pacific Changes, and how they could affect global balance, DOW, and other things

This is from a post analyzing the NO on the thread on the Pacific 1940 board.

@SAS:

Thinking about it a little more I suppose it basically compensates Japan for removing the 1 or 2 planes from the setup (build a fighter for each of the 2 turns Japan will get the NO until the US comes in turn 3) and forces them to be further back from the front lines when they are built.  At least the Japanese only will get the NO for 2 turns pretty much.

So essentially the changes keep the Japanese initially the same, just with a little less airforce available immediately, and boosts the Allies a little bit.  I suppose with that explanation and the historical basis of the embargo on Japan after they began attacking I’m feeling a little more comfortable with it.

Just remember that Japan would only be getting this NO before the US is allowed to declare war on them, and unless the US player is daft they will do that as soon as they are allowed to in order to get their own NO, so Japan will only be getting this NO twice.  I guess potentially 3 times really since if they don’t declare war themselves on turn 3 they would still get it since they go before the US.

A question for transferring this NO to global though, Krieg: do you know if it will be transferred as currently worded where Japan being at war with Russia does not negate this NO either?  Because otherwise it’s all the more reason for Russia to declare war on Japan right away (as if they didn’t have enough reason already).

If this NO makes it into the global game, I doubt the USSR will be included in it.

@Krieghund:

If this NO makes it into the global game, I doubt the USSR will be included in it.

IF?

Isn’t it a little late to be saying if? I was under the impression that the Global 40 rulebook is included in E40… I would think the game is on its way to retailers, if not there already.

Wouldn’t the Global book specify if this NO is in the game?

@LHoffman:

@Krieghund:

If this NO makes it into the global game, I doubt the USSR will be included in it.

IF?

Isn’t it a little late to be saying if? I was under the impression that the Global 40 rulebook is included in E40… I would think the game is on its way to retailers, if not there already.

Wouldn’t the Global book specify if this NO is in the game?

There could be an erratum

@ finnman-my test game is starting the 4th round. Japan only has 2 land units in India and no land units in asia. Japan has a pile of planes and naval near Burma. US will build a Major IC next turn with 14 Russian inf to hold it.US air sweeps removed the last 4 land units in China. China has 15inf?, 4art, 1ftr. I want to test WHY not to do a J1 attack.

@LHoffman:

@Krieghund:

If this NO makes it into the global game, I doubt the USSR will be included in it.

IF?

Isn’t it a little late to be saying if? I was under the impression that the Global 40 rulebook is included in E40… I would think the game is on its way to retailers, if not there already.

Wouldn’t the Global book specify if this NO is in the game?

Right, like calvin said, there could be an erratum.  They are talking about implementing some or all of these changes into the Pacific 1940 game.  If that happens, in the interest of keeping the global setup consistent with the setups from the Europe and Pacific 1940 games, whatever setup changes are made to the Pacific 1940 game will also be applied to the global game.  They already have a setup erratum for the Pacific 1940 game and that erratum already applies to the global game, this would simply expand that erratum.

However, since the NOs for global are different from those of the individual games, this NO would not necessarily have to transfer; though honestly I think it might be more necessary for Japan in the global game than it is in the Pacific game by itself.  Japan might need a little extra boost in global when having to deal with the extra headaches of coordinating with the political situation in Europe and the Russians outside of Manchuria and Korea, while in Pacific Japan obviously does just fine on her own right now and might still be able to get by even without a plane or two even with the other setup changes. :-P

@SAS:

Right, like calvin said, there could be an erratum.  They are talking about implementing some or all of these changes into the Pacific 1940 game.  If that happens, in the interest of keeping the global setup consistent with the setups from the Europe and Pacific 1940 games, whatever setup changes are made to the Pacific 1940 game will also be applied to the global game.  They already have a setup erratum for the Pacific 1940 game and that erratum already applies to the global game, this would simply expand that erratum.

True. If it is in Pacific errata, I would think it would have been put in the Global book… since there was such a time delay between the two games.

Is there someplace where the Pacific erratum setup is located? Yes, I figure in the Pacific 40 Errata, but can you give me a specific link, if you know where it is?

@LHoffman:

@SAS:

Right, like calvin said, there could be an erratum.  They are talking about implementing some or all of these changes into the Pacific 1940 game.  If that happens, in the interest of keeping the global setup consistent with the setups from the Europe and Pacific 1940 games, whatever setup changes are made to the Pacific 1940 game will also be applied to the global game.  They already have a setup erratum for the Pacific 1940 game and that erratum already applies to the global game, this would simply expand that erratum.

True. If it is in Pacific errata, I would think it would have been put in the Global book… since there was such a time delay between the two games.

Is there someplace where the Pacific erratum setup is located? Yes, I figure in the Pacific 40 Errata, but can you give me a specific link, if you know where it is?

Look in the AAP40 FAQ in the P40 forum

@calvinhobbesliker:

@LHoffman:

Is there someplace where the Pacific erratum setup is located? Yes, I figure in the Pacific 40 Errata, but can you give me a specific link, if you know where it is?

Look in the AAP40 FAQ in the P40 forum

Well, I knew that… but I will take a look. Thanks.

True. If it is in Pacific errata, I would think it would have been put in the Global book… since there was such a time delay between the two games.

these possible changes just came about in the last couple weeks.  way too late to put in Global book.  if you go to LH’s website, he’s having a discussion in regards to balancing out AAP40.

The AAP40 changes were posted for many to test these changes. They are not official. Please help test them for balance.

@johnnymarr:

True. If it is in Pacific errata, I would think it would have been put in the Global book… since there was such a time delay between the two games.

these possible changes just came about in the last couple weeks.  way too late to put in Global book.  if you go to LH’s website, he’s having a discussion in regards to balancing out AAP40.

I see… Unfortunately I am not up to date on everything; Europe/Global rules, NOs etc… even some Pacific stuff. I just haven’t had the time to root around and read all the info.  :|

I find it amusing reading about you fine folks wanting to change the global setup before you’ve had a chance to actually play it.

I have a feeling the out of box rules will do just fine with 18 Russians sitting near Manchuria. Not to mention the smaller complimentary force that will enter China from the west. And the minor complex in India that most will be sure to build.

If you’re going to complain that the initial playtesters didn’t do a great job, then lets not be premature when we get the chance to do the same. Which thankfully for most is only a few days away…

@General:

I find it amusing reading about you fine folks wanting to change the global setup before you’ve had a chance to actually play it.

I have a feeling the out of box rules will do just fine with 18 Russians sitting near Manchuria. Not to mention the smaller complimentary force that will enter China from the west. And the minor complex in India that most will be sure to build.

If you’re going to complain that the initial playtesters didn’t do a great job, then lets not be premature when we get the chance to do the same. Which thankfully for most is only a few days away…

I like your name.

I like your name.

Awesome hockey player. And as such - the Wehrmacht is under strict orders to not cross the Swedish frontier…

@General:

I like your name.

Awesome hockey player. And as such - the Wehrmacht is under strict orders to not cross the Swedish frontier…

Well thank you, it is my own name after all.

Big Red Wings fan myself… I will defend Sweden with you.  :-D

I find it amusing reading about you fine folks wanting to change the global setup before you’ve had a chance to actually play it.

Larry is trying to balance AAP40, not AAE40.  He realized that the J1 attack was the best option for Japan, not 1 of 3 options for Japan.  He is trying to do this without changing the balance of Global.

Precisely, global may well be better balanced, but Pacific 1940 (which has been out for about 9 months) gives Japan a distinct advantage.  This is what Larry (the game creator) is trying to fix.  In the interest of consistency (as I stated in my previous post), whatever setup changes are made to the Pacific setup will be the same in the global setup, thus the setup changes for Pacific must be tested in the global game as well.

So far all the changes Larry has made would effect Global in the favour of the Allies. I saw one suggestion in the thread that wouldn’t have that large of an effect on Global, but would still balance the J1 attack. It was to move the SZ33 navy to SZ19, to prevent it from immediately joining the action. This, in addition to moving the UK transports back to safer waters and giving the ANZAC a naval base in NSW could balance Pacific and keep Global balanced too.