Minor Threat's Alpha+3.9 (Global 1940) COMPLETE! Setup Charts

Over a year ago, there was a discussion thread somewhere on this forum (I can’t recall in what section) about GTO’s demise.  As I recall, GTO was supposedly saying that it was shutting down temporarily and that it would return sometime in the following year with a new game that it would be offering in some kind of partnership with Larry Harris rather than WotC.  The details were quite vague, and nothing seems to have come of that initiative…assuming that it was indeed an initiative that had any substance to it, rather than just speculation.

@corporal:

  I have the Global 1939 from Historical Boardgaming….was wondering if anyone has come up with a '39 setup for Global 1940

Go to House rule forum and look at the AARHE rules files, its a sticky.

@innocentbystander:

Question for the newbie.  The UK’s one and only national objective, hold on to all their territories in their European economy (and West India has been traded for British Columbia.)  What if (by chance) Italy captures Gibraltar?  That isn’t worth anything (economically) in the European theater.  But if valueless territory (and that one alone) is in the hands of Italy, that voids the UK’s one and only national objective, correct?

Yes, UK must hold all its Europe territories, including ones without income.

the full germany push to russia is generally the way to go.

I just am skeptical of japan doing early russia play, because the income japan gets out of it is small and he gives up much in his setup. Makes dealing with china / uk pac / anzac / usa really hard especially at a low income.

I am a full believer in a strong japan going for his objectives. It makes allies commit more and makes allies have less income as a whole

@Redjac:

Commander Jennifer,

How do we check on your games? Where are they?

Redjac

On these forums in the play games section.

Round 4 with Corriganbp, I have England and India and a large show of force down in the DEI for Japan.  He’s got infantry in China, but that does not bother me.  They are not getting reinfroced, they cannot take a VC and I am already close to a VC win for Japan.  Figure another 3 rounds and it’s lights out for the Allies.  (He evacuated the Pacific in hopes of being able to liberate London.)

It could facilitate blind games, which are loads of fun but currently very tedious and time-consuming.  (I’ve played one on AAR)

blind games=basically you can’t see the units in enemy territory, except perhaps in the ones adjacent to your own.  for now it takes 2 separate boards and one non-player person willing to be the moderator to keep the boards synced.

@13thguardsriflediv:

Planes were mostly used to attack sz 111, 112, Yugo and France. It is why sz 110 did not get hit. The other seazones west of England and east of Canada were hit by subs. No German fighters landed in southern Italy to help against Taranto which was an oversight.

UK would have thought twice if without the cruiser and facing three fighters. But maybe not, sometimes I like dicey battles (no risk no glory).

If the U.K. pulls that carrier out of the Med. then it can join the Indian fleet to help defend the Indies and if the U.S. is building enough navy in the Pacific the allies can put a lot of pressure on Japan. Japan cannot move south unless they bring a sizeable navy which will leave the home islands open to invasion by the U.S.

I am currently in the middle of my first game of Global using Alpha. It is going really well actually. We have played 6 games of global in our group (this alpha game is our 7th). Initially we certainly believed that there is a distinct allied advantage, and I still do. I believe that only very skilled players playing as the Axis have a chance of winning with them, and that is if they play against mistake prone allied players. If you have skilled allied players against equally or even more skilled Axis players, the Allies seem unbeatable barring extreme luck or blunders going in Axis favor.

We have 1 victory for the Axis, and that actually came down to our two best players who are much better than the rest of the group playing Axis, and the allies were made up of our third best player and two totally new players. America’s player was playing for the first time ever. And the Axis just barely won due to a 1/36 tech miracle and botched allied play (poor use of transports).

There were also 3 allied victories, and 2 games we called draws, but the allies would have won if we decided to play for weeks longer…

We are currently on J3 in our latest game with our first go at the Alpha setup. We also have the same two players as Axis, only this time switching powers. I have to admit that I think I like this setup better as Germany because our UK player is infamous for bringing the whole british empire into Egypt and holding Africa with overwhelming force while threatening Italy all game long. Less planes and ships and initial transports makes this harder for him and makes Italy more viable. Also we started with a G2 DoW on USSR. Things are going very well for them with the USSR’s hardware in dead zones, so by R4 they will be down to only Inf.

Japan is doing very well also in China and with the sizeable Manchurian land force nipping at the retreating Russian’s heels in Siberia. The lack of planes certainly is putting a cramp in Japan’s game play in the Pacific itself, and in its Caroline/Hawaiian posturing against the Angloish-Allies, but they are still in a solid position. I the new naval base in NSW is a very interesting double edged sword. It makes Australia very happy that they can move around a bit easier, and can claim DNG on ANZAC1, but they have to be careful because it no longer is a dead end for the IJN, which makes ANZAC a viable target for Japan.