Agreed. Gives much more meaning to North Africa and the Med. And it gives Russia and UK Far East a bit more to worry about. Something from the original Europe game that’s been missing!
Okay…I will probably get flamed for this, but I have played Global '40 only once, 4 months ago, never had time to get my playgroup together again ever since, haven’t read up on anything, up untill now.
We have a new game planned in a week.
Why all these changes?
And…will someone provide me with a new board, new charts, a new rule book, or am I supposed to figure it out myself?
Axis and Allies is turning quite gimmicky, when I have to confront my playgroup with: “Ow yeah, btw…that rule book, and all those pics you have been studying the past time…? Throw them out.”
Okay…I will probably get flamed for this, but I have played Global '40 only once, 4 months ago, never had time to get my playgroup together again ever since, haven’t read up on anything, up untill now.
We have a new game planned in a week.
Why all these changes?
And…will someone provide me with a new board, new charts, a new rule book, or am I supposed to figure it out myself?
Axis and Allies is turning quite gimmicky, when I have to confront my playgroup with: “Ow yeah, btw…that rule book, and all those pics you have been studying the past time…? Throw them out.”
Board doesn’t change (why would it? It still has the same ol’ typos it always had). Rule books are constantly updated with Errata as an “print it yourself” for most any game of complexity, A&A is HARDLY an exception. If by charts, you mean setup charts, and you feel that they absolutely have to be printed by the mfr and glued to your nation boxes, well, sorry, that’s unlikely to happen until a reprint. But that setup was wrong to begin with on the Pacific side (ANZAC factories), so if you use any errata you already HAD altered setups.
The rules haven’t changed THAT much. Basically they are the same, but refined to mainly clarify neutral behavior, especially Russian aggression techniques and cheaterific US naval ploys. Scrambling makes more sense (coasts now included) you just need to remember it’s a max of three (not hard to remember). And the Sub transport pot shot which had epic debates regarding the nature of “escorts” simply got removed for simplicity. Price change for AA guns back to AA50. And I don’t know about you, but I’d have printed out the National Objectives for each country anyway, so it’s just a new print and list. It’s too tedious to pass the rule books back and forth.
As for studying the board… well, now everyone is in the same boat again. We all have a new setup but the same basic premises apply, and if you’d only played ONE global game, you still probably hadn’t developed an optimum strategy. So now it’s something new.
If your group is resistant to Errata (some people insist on OOB) then no worries. This in the long run is just a better setup that leads to more balanced play without requiring a bid that can VASTLY imbalance the game (imagine a G1 bid of 14 for 2 transports… ugh).
Hot Damn. From the sounds of it on Larry’s official thread this seems to be the FINAL changes. Nothing else planned for changed, correct?
This is not necessarily the final version. There is more testing to be done before it can be considered finalized.
@Hellmutt:
Why the extra UK plane in Normandy?? I didn’t see any discussion on the Harris site regarding that addition.
It can also be used to attack the Italian navy.
Final? I hope not we have 3 global versions now one can play any they want it’s just rapid A&A evolution at the moment
Nice job on the charts questioneer. ~~Two things I noticed as missing on your setup cards is the Ukraine gets 3 inf and a minor IC, and Kiangsi gets 3 inf and 1 art.~~Keep up the good work.
Oops, posted in the wrong thread… :oops:
@morrel:
Final? I hope not we have 3 global versions now one can play any they want it’s just rapid A&A evolution at the moment
Thankfully we can all play the version we want to play, I play a self-adapted version of Alpha 1 which I believe to be very balanced, and am now slowly adding house rules (difficult since every change might upset the delicate balance).
I would not be surprised to learn that the Ukraine IC turns out to be a game breaker.
I thought of one seemingly important question I haven’t seen asked during this play test process… No one is using the techs, right? I say that because with the right tech, any country could end up with a game breaker. To put it simply, in order for us to achieve this “balance” that we are looking for, all play testers should NOT be using techs. Just wanted to make sure that we minimize the outside “luck” variables in this process.
Board doesn’t change (why would it? It still has the same ol’ typos it always had).
I thought I read something somewhere about changes TT values? Not the case?
But as Krieghund friendly suggested in my other thread: I’ll stick with OOB rules for now. Sucks though, because pretty much all the strategic posts on this forum are based on some kind of Alpha.
WHats happened to the US NO of boosting income at war? And what are the new starting incomes? Are they the same?
If the US doesnt get its extra IPC’s, isnt it a huge nerf to the allies?
Also, If german naval units are moving into the channel, and germany attacks uk navy, can planes scramble to assist from uk?
These questions have already been asked and answered.
I thought of one seemingly important question I haven’t seen asked during this play test process… No one is using the techs, right? I say that because with the right tech, any country could end up with a game breaker. To put it simply, in order for us to achieve this “balance” that we are looking for, all play testers should NOT be using techs. Just wanted to make sure that we minimize the outside “luck” variables in this process.
I’d prefer that tech is used for testing, because that’s a work that should be done before selling the game, and I want to continue using the tech (the biggest advance in AA50 was ignored by some reason in 40 series). At least one could hope that they’re going to test the tech a bit after selling the game :-P Tech doesn’t affect the game balance, but the way of playing (requires more skill in case of using tech), specially with the very nerfed techs that now we have
The only reason I’m not using tech by now is that Larry did a huge setback reviving the Classic system of non-persistent tech teams … big error: AA50 was the way, or at least Revised
Please, Mr. Harris: decide for once the ruleset and setup for this game, and use WOTC testers for the next one before selling it, not free testers on the web after selling. Surely not your fault, but this is going to hurt big A&A future selling
These questions have already been asked and answered.
Sorry, but I dont see the answers to my questions in this thread.
These questions have already been asked and answered.
Sorry, but I dont see the answers to my questions in this thread.
The answers aren’t in this thread; they’re in the FAQ and probably a couple of other threads.
Edit: I actually didn’t look through the thread, but apparently they are here (as per Krieghund’s post below).
WHats happened to the US NO of boosting income at war? And what are the new starting incomes? Are they the same?
If the US doesnt get its extra IPC’s, isnt it a huge nerf to the allies?
Also, If german naval units are moving into the channel, and germany attacks uk navy, can planes scramble to assist from uk?
The US still gets boosted income - it’s just spread out a bit to make it easier for the Axis to disrupt.
1. Collect 10 IPCs per turn for complete control of the continental US (WUS, CUS, EUS). Theme: Basic national sovereignty.
2. Collect 5 IPC per turn if the Allies control 5 of the 7 following islands. Midway, Wake, Marianas, Iwo Jima, Caroline, Solomon Islands and Guam. Theme: Islands considered to be vital strategic forward bases.
3. Collect 5 IPCs per turn for controlling the Philippines. Theme: Center of American influence in Asia.
4. Collect 5 IPCs per turn for controlling Hawaii, Alaska, the Aleutian Islands, Line Islands, and Johnston Island. Theme National sovereignty issues.
5. Collect 5 IPCs per turn for controlling, Mexico, Southern Mexico, Central America (Panama) and the West indies. Theme: Defense treaty & trade obligations.
It’s not a nerf, considering the US still gets the full 30 IPCs. It makes the game a bit easier for the axis (compared to OOB, which was unbalanced towards the allies).
And yes, UK planes can scramble to assist a naval battle in the channel.
These questions have already been asked and answered.
Sorry, but I dont see the answers to my questions in this thread.
They’re at the bottom of page 1 and the top of page 2.
3. Collect 10 IPCs, once, for Soviet capture of Berlin (Germany). Theme: National prestige.
If Zhukov takes Berlin is game over. Why even bothering about collecting 10ipc for the USSR? Building up for the Cold War?
3. Collect 10 IPCs, once, for Soviet capture of Berlin (Germany). Theme: National prestige.
If Zhukov takes Berlin is game over. Why even bothering about collecting 10ipc for the USSR? Building up for the Cold War?
There could be a situation where Japan has decimated all enemies in the Pacific but the USSR took Berlin (possibly with the USA focusing on the Europe board). In that case it could make sense.
3. Collect 10 IPCs, once, for Soviet capture of Berlin (Germany). Theme: National prestige.
If Zhukov takes Berlin is game over. Why even bothering about collecting 10ipc for the USSR? Building up for the Cold War?
those 10 bucks may be really useful to assemble a nice Victory Parade at the Red Square :-D
These questions have already been asked and answered.
Sorry, but I dont see the answers to my questions in this thread.
They’re at the bottom of page 1 and the top of page 2.
Ah, very sorry for missing this.
Thanks so much for answering my questions. (and to the previous poster)
