New Italian Sculpts?

@shadowhawk

oh boo. My computer is work laptop, and I don’t have privileges to install game.

Italian canopening is even more effective when combined with the Germany “Dark Skies” option with lots of bombers.  The tanks+mechs+bomber attack options means that the Allies cannot place moderate-sized stacks within two spaces of the German/Italian main stack.  Russia ends up cowering in Moscow with a few minor exchanges each round.  UK ends up with a strong stack near Iraq, never daring to move it too close to the Germans.

Meanwhile the huge range of the German bombers give that power flexibility to find opportunistic attacks:
*Allied ground forces in W. Europe
*Allied ships in the Atlantic
*Allied ships in the Med
*Push into Siberia
*Mid-game Sealion or Egypt attack

I am not saying that this plan guarantees victory, but it allows League players to aim towards eventual victory in G13-17.  Most face-to-face games end up with a Moscow attack on G5-8 when the Axis players just decide that the numbers look close enough.  With the battlecaculator and more time on PBEM/PBF games, Germany can comb through the options every turn and patiently wait for the right opening with a big TUV swing.

It’s the same reason why China doesn’t have its own fighter or artillery. They were just being cheap which is why I bought five artillery and the old p40 from the original AnA and painted them Chinese Green.

The Chinese have strange rules but the exceptions they get makes them exceptional. The ability to raise new units in a newly captured territory is overwhelmingly powerful. Even though they can only raise INF and ART, the ability to have one main stack and move it anywhere while building, instead of having to defend a particular territory, would be gamebreaking if China wasn’t restricted to Chinese territories and Burma and given a fairly low number of starting units.

@CWO:

@DizzKneeLand33:

Apparently none of you has a cat…

Yes, the cat issue is something that’s come up a few times on this board, as the picture below will illustrate.  I can’t recall if the suggestions were made seriously or not, but some board members have thought about protecting their games-in-progress from one weekend to the next by using a system of overhead pulleys to either raise the table to the ceiling or lower a protective hood over the map.  Feasible for a dedicated gaming room in the basement, but not likely to be approved for the living room by the lady of the house.

That is SO CUTE!!!

How well does the cat play?  Does he attack the US on turn one? :-D

@Krieghund:

Try using the same setup, but adding an NO for Japan that gives it 10 IPCs each turn that it’s not at war with any of the following powers: USA, UK/ANZAC, or France.  Have fun, and let us know how it goes!

i will glad to see it in the next faq, because this “new” Japan is a bit weak. i think this new NO is a good point between historical accuracy and balancing. I hope that will be approved by LH.

Russia, man.  Since I started playing Classic, Russia goes to the newb.  Center of the action, forgiving because it’s huge, easy purchases, don’t have to learn naval units yet, straightforward strategy, roll fistfuls of dice.

“Look, here, buy as many infantry as you can afford.  Hold off the Germans.  Keep your planes alive.  Stall the japs in Siberia.”

Axis?  No way.

SHARED THIS ON LARRY’S SITE ALREADY, JUST WANTED TO SHARE THOUGHTS HERE ALSO:

Ok Larry,

Me and an official playtester of yours here in Michigan (his name is mentioned in the rulebook for Europe 40) played Global with the new setup given with all the aircraft taken away and such. Here was a short summary of what happened:

On the Europe side:

Germany played pretty predictably, sinking most of the UK navy, taking France and the Eastern European pro-allied and pro-axis neutrals with Italy. They continued to build on their air force to keep the UK from building ships right away. Began to stack some ground units as well. Italy expanded into Africa and shored the Middle East slowly controlling the Med.

UK responded by NOT attcking the Italian navy and pulling back the rest of the navy it had left until it could come back to England with a strong navy that included the US. UK took the Pro-allied Brazil and shucked the troops to Africa to help the SAfrican force which slowly pushed the Italians back up to Egypt turning the tide in Africa.

Russia stedily built a force consisting of infantry spiced with some tanks, artillery, tacs and mechs. Stacking behind some dead zones and waiting for the declaration of war.

US spent about 70-80% of its cash in the Pacific since it could not even approach Africa/Europe before a state of war.

Now for the Pacific side:

India with little cash built mostly infantry and stacked. Combined navy near India and activated the Persian troops to bring back and help defend India. In Global, India has a little more help from some extra troops west and a few ships, including one French destroyer to help defend. Also, it can fall back with its stack to West India if needed.

ANZAC naval base is much needed and I am glad it is there- balances nicely.

China was stonger, but does what it normally does and stacks at Yunnan to wait to wear down Japs. China units are really used as a delaying tactic for the India crush.

Japan didn’t see an advantage to the India crush in J1 but felt that the initiative came to them in J2. They didn’t want to wait until J3 because they felt the Allies would have established a long-term defense of India. So with that the Japs declared war on J2 taking back the Dutch East Indies and unleashing the fury. Japan built transports J1 and J2 and built more planes to replace the ones missing from the new setup in J2.

Now even though both Japs and Allies have the same amount of planes removed, Japan can build them faster and move them closer to the action (India). US could also build their planes back but it takes them longer to get them to the battle scene (India). Brit India and ANZAC can’t build much of an airforce because of the typhoon of Jap units coming fast, so India stacks and ANZAC tries to distract and/or try to send some units.

Japan can make the US wait longer to send ships and planes down to ANZAC by using its navy as a shield. I as Allies, I made tactical blunder ruining my chance to meet the Jap onslaught of India from behind through Australia. However, if not for this the setup seems very balanced and gave some options to both sides.

A hot topic question will be “what to do with the Russian inf on the Pacific side??”
It is very frustrating for the Russians, if you attack immediately, Japan will bring the heat to wipe them out with now China and Russia give large concessions to Japan $$$. If you stack and sit. Japan has to garrison Manchu with a small force but continues to spearhead to India. I figure as the Russians, you have to attack with the 18 inf at some point. The hard part is when. Timing is everything in this decision.

With US entering the war at turn 2, the US began to throw a good amount of cash to the European side, mainly because of the blunder in the Pacific- India would not last long now- 2-3 more rounds. I recovered nicely putting pressure on the French coast quickly until I made another tactical error involving Gibraltar- arrggh!!!- new rules and new map takes a little while getting used to.  :-(

Besides these 2 blunders, I thought the Global game was pretty fair and balanced with a slight edge to the Allies. I definitely think the Allies are a little easier to play because that sides is spilt into 6 sub parts (countries) that are easy to prepare while you are waiting for the Axis to finish. The Axis with so many more units in the beginning, take longer and you have to be very efficient both in the short-term and the long-term planning.

Anyway that was are anaylsis so I hope it helps.  :-)