1939 Map

Yes to all your questions.
When Germany activates Finland (3 icps), Hungary (3 icps), Bulgaria (4 icps) and Romania (6 icps) Germany adds these amounts (16 icps) to there income total. Also each one of these pro-axis neutrals collects the same amount for there own income.
The pro-axis minors can buy each turn and place in there territories only. Finland only in Capital.
I actually had different colors for all pro neutrals in game. With Pro-axis neutrals for thee above 4 with different color armies you can see what the Germans are buying and not getting confused if you make them all German looking pieces. Keeps the buyer honest or others can see the buy.

The buy most times in game per turn is Finland 1 Inf, Hungary 1 Inf, Bulgaria 1 Art, and Romania 1 Tank or sometimes 2 Inf.

Germany also likes to buy a Major factory in Romania to get a bunch of Inf for fodder quicker to the front or Mechs, Art for blitzing or a stack of tanks to run down to Leningrad or push into Stalingrad or a naval base in Romania and if Russia income allows them to go to war against Germany turn 4.

@Erocco:

Based on the German Minor Set 1 tank destroyers stats are A-D-M-C 5-5-2-5 with target selection: 1-2 (armor class units). Does this seem a bit OP given medium tanks are A-D-M-C 6-5-2-6 w/ blitz ability.

Btw how many of you use the tank destroyer unit for all nations in your games?

This target selection is based on an over-amplified bias toward tactical combat scale.
At strategic level, a given division has to fight other units which are in a given TTy and cannot pick according to its taste.

And compared to a Tank, a 5 IPCs targeting unit with one small offense pip (on a 12-sides dice) less is clearly better.
Fortunately, blitz is for Tank.

You may think about lowering some combat values but add a combined factor with Tank, Mech Inf or even Self-Propelled Artillery.

Thanks! Lots of good ideas. HGB has a ton of options but we didn’t want to ‘go all out’ on pieces until playing it through at least once. Since they’ll be releasing a supplemental set, I may wait.

I like the place markers idea and already made some. After T1, Germany has 5 units on Luxembourg – it can’t fit half of one unit.

I should’ve bought the 4x8 map :cry:  Even so, I think the map still needs another rev. Squish all those empty USSR zones east and make some more room for Europe. Not accurate but…

@thenorthman:

Concur. The game from reading is awesome and watching g folks on YouTube. My first foray on it should be this upcoming weekend or so. (Have to finish some door hanging and remodeling first.)

I have a few questions that I am compiling. I have things I think I can assume but will look for clarification on what others think. Minor things.

Definitely post questions in the forum or at the Global War page. I’m sure we’ll be able to knock them out together!

@Munck:

HBG just responded to my question about the 1939 setup on Facebook.

They are done. We are reviewing them do look for them in a couple weeks.

Good news�  :mrgreen:

Awesome news, Munck! :-D

It should be the same for Nat China. Szechwan falls, China can’t build no more whether they have 3 or more territories worth 3 icp’s or more.
If it’s liberated then they will get 6 icp’s and any non captured territories and can start building again.

If they have some money left and Szechwan is captured, they should have to give money to attacker. I would like to try this in a game.

The rule is as long as they have territories worth total of 3 icp’s or more, they can build and place in those territories.

This looks like the lead up to an allied win. The axis is being bottled up and the US isn’t even in the game yet. If the allies maintain the pressure and delays, it will go their way. Russia should be getting help now.

I do have a quick question for the creators brought up while discussing the minor axis powers in another thread:

If the Germans build a naval base on Romania can the Romanians (who don’t need an IC) build ships in the Black Sea to help protect an axis fleet, or do they only produce ground/air units in their capital (not ships next to it)? Using the same principle, are they allowed to build a ftr for a German (or Italian) carrier in the Black Sea? Obviously they would have to had saved some IPCs.

I believe this next part is still under review, any word yet?

This leads me to a 2nd question, say the Germans build a minor IC in both Romania, and Bulgaria, and a NB for Bulgaria (sz43 Black Sea). I know the Germans could build ships in the Black Sea from the Bulgarian IC w/NB, but would the same NB servicing sz43 also fill the requirement to allow for ships to be built from Germany’s Romanian IC adjacent to it? Can a NB from one territory service an IC from a different territory (for ship building) as long as they share the same sz, and are owned by the same power. This is also in question if UK builds an IC for Cairo which comes w/NB servicing the Med sz47 (allows you to build ships in sz47). Can the same Cairo IC (would also be adjacent to sz64) also build ships in the Red Sea using the Upper Egypt NB that services sz64 as long as they owned both Cairo & Upper Egypt?

Further more in a similar situation as above, can a NB in a territory of your ally serve the requirements for shipbuilding for an IC you own as long as they are adjacent to the same sz? Say the Italians take Holland and build a NB (sz 16). Would the Italian NB allow the Germans to drop ships into sz 16 from their adjacent major IC in W Germany?