HBG's Global War 1939 Rules 5.1 and Setup 5.0

Can you give us a short summary of the changes? Or are they just very small?
Btw will you add additional optional units in the near future, like self propelled artillery?
Edit:
And will there be a setup in the future which features early units, which will be upgraded to better units in the course of the game? That would be awesome  :-D

I downloaded the 5.0 set-up. I like how everything is organized/labeled, it seems to flow better for quick reference.

It looks like naval bases are getting tweaked. Looks like they are still linked to individual territories, but have now been assigned to sz’s as well. This is a great change, and should work very well.

Example: (if I’m interpreting correctly) NB at Gib benefits sz 35 (Atlantic), but not sz 36 (Med).

I assume that if you buy a naval base you would also need to tell what sz it will be assigned to (if more then one available).

Other things I noticed (may need to be addressed):

German naval base was removed from Stettin, but not reassigned to sz 18, was this an over sight?

Russia still list NB in Leningrad and new placement in sz 20 (Lenn). It’s not a big deal (just redundant). Russian destroyer moved to Baltic (good change IMO).

Japan NB in sz 123 (BEIP) I guess is linked to Peking (Beijing)?  Can’t wait to see how the Japan sneak attack worked out, and what restrictions they may (or may not) have in the new rule set 5.1

UK Early Warning Radar looks cool. Glad to see an inf at Gib, and Malta gets an inf & AB. Many changes/add-ons to the naval base network for UK, Anz, France and Dutch on both sides of the globe (should be interesting to who gets/keeps control of them).

Italy (not much change), but it will be interesting to see how things play out for them w/the new NB arrangements, and Malta getting an AB.

USA I noticed that sz128 (Midway) was added to the US list, but nothing placed there. Was a NB (or AB) planned for sz 128, then dropped? The way I’m reading the new naval base rules (w/o seeing them of course) is only sz 92 (Philippines) will benefit from the NB.

China (if I’m reading it right) can only place new units on territories they have owned from the beginning of their turn is also new (unless I missed that originally). This will make it harder on them not being able to plop down (3) new units on territories they have just liberated. Also thought we might have seen China get an AA gun, but oh well.

Neutrals:

No inf added to S America  :-(  (thought maybe a couple so allies don’t get them too easily).

Some changes to the neutral navies (mostly coastal battleships). This kinda controls how they are invaded. Do you want to attack through the BB, or from a different direction and deal with it later?

Double checking on ship placement:
Denmark -sz 17?
Portugal -sz 32?

PS: Can’t wait to see 5.1 rule set (hopefully this weekend).

I took a look at the test game on Facebook, an 11 rounder awesome. Not too much detail or comments about how some of the changes worked out (or what changes were made), but I assume the test run gave you guys the data needed to make the final tweaks to the 5.1 rules set. Now that the test is done have you finalized 5.1, and uploaded it yet. I understand it will take 3-4 days for BGG to post it, just kinda wanted to know a timeline if possible.

Thanks WB

BTW we normally give China an AA gun in our G40 games because they only fire 3 shots now w/Alpha or 2nd Ed rules. Being able to fire at all planes w/one AA gun in GW39 might be over the top, but would also slow up air sweeps (will take a look at it). Have you guys done any test runs for GW39 using the new AAA rules that G40 has adopted?

@WILD:

I took a look at the test game on Facebook, an 11 rounder awesome. Not too much detail or comments about how some of the changes worked out (or what changes were made), but I assume the test run gave you guys the data needed to make the final tweaks to the 5.1 rules set. Now that the test is done have you finalized 5.1, and uploaded it yet. I understand it will take 3-4 days for BGG to post it, just kinda wanted to know a timeline if possible.

Thanks WB

BTW we normally give China an AA gun in our G40 games because they only fire 3 shots now w/Alpha or 2nd Ed rules. Being able to fire at all planes w/one AA gun in GW39 might be over the top, but would also slow up air sweeps (will take a look at it). Have you guys done any test runs for GW39 using the new AAA rules that G40 has adopted?

Im kind of old school when it comes to the AA guns.  One shot per plane before the first round of combat. To me it is the simplest way to use the unit.  Thats just me….FYI, I think we may add an AA or 2 for China.

Excellent, thanks for the reply

Thanks for the new set-up.
Our group played last weekend (didn’t use the new setup). My partner and I lost as the axis after fourteen turns. Regardless, some things we discussed were:

It seems that the game could be longer when playing with technology or that the allies should have to capture at least one axis capital for the win (optional rule maybe).

We’ve been using the new rules for AA but want to incorporate flak towers. Are there any plans to put together some rules for those?––Chinese AA sounds good. Less expensive Japanese armour sounds even better…hint hint :wink:.

I’d love to use the armoured train markers from HBG (especially for the Soviets!). Will there be any rules for those in the near future?

We might use the oil rules next time. Has anyone used them? What is the impact on the game?

Happy to see the coastal ships’ rules have been clarified. Are there any plans to produce miniatures for them?

Looking forward to the new rules for our upcoming Global '39 Marathon over the holidays (big order in the works).

Thank you for the new setup. Just a couple of things I just wanted to ask to make sure I am reading this right. First is Russia. You have a major IC in Karelia. I have the second gen map. On my map Karelia is 2 IPC territory which can not support a major IC. It showed the same in the 4.1 setup. I was not sure if that was going to be fixed or not. Next is UK. You have UK Commonwealth making 35 IPC. I count only 33 IPC on that side(Africa + Gib = 12 IPC, Brit Island + Lab = 11 IPC, Convoy = 10 IPC). I know on the old map the convoy off of Madagascar went to the UK Commonwealth side, but on the new map it goes to India which is now showing 23 IPC(use to be 21 IPC) which is correct. Is my map wrong or am I missing something somewhere?

I have wondered about the Karelia major IC too (for different reasons). I didn’t notice the conflict w/2 IPC territory though (good pick up). With me it was that if Germany captures the Karalia major IC that it becomes a minor that can be used by the enemy (unless that was changed again in 5.1 rules). I know that the Russians can relocate their capital there, but in our games Karalia falls before Moscow so it wouldn’t be an option anyway.

The next time I play on the allies side though I plan on a more aggressive Russia in the north early in the game (Finland). Still not sure if I would move the capital there though, unless the Western Allies were in position to help hold it. We thought the Russians might have been better served with a minors on both Leningrad and Karelia. That way if the Germans capture them the ICs are just removed (this was the old rule, it changed w/5.1), but if you moved the capital there the limited production could be a problem. At that point the Russians won’t have much income though so maybe a minor is all they will need.

Any way really looking forward to the updated rule set (5.1). We are going to start a new game Thurs or Fri using the updated set-up, and hope to also have the new rule set too.

Just for into the new rules are out. It took me a little bit to find them at board game geek. I was thinking they will make a new post for them. They put them as an update under the 5.0 rule set post which is the third one down.

Wow thanks themojaverattler. I was looking for a new post at the top of the downloads on BGG w/Nov post date on the far right side like they did for the 5.0 set-up. Wonder how many others have missed it too, its been out for about a week now. Even the description is misleading saying 5.0, when the new rule packet is 5.1. I will print it out and take a look tonight when I get home.

Thanks again WB

Have a few questions, or comments. Some may have been addressed before (apologies).

1. Kinda surprised to see no Denmark straight rule when you have both the Turkish and Gibraltar straights now in the game. Thought Denmark would control passage in or out of the Baltic (between sz17 & sz18). Was it just thought to give Germany too much protection?

2a) If you have a coastal IC, can you build a naval base and mobilize ships in the same turn. Or would you need to build the naval base in one turn, and mobilize ships in the next turn.

2b) Say UK builds a minor IC in Cairo. Cairo starts with a naval base in sz 47, so you could build ships in the Med (no problem). Upper Egypt also has a naval base that services sz 64 (adjacent to Cairo), are you allowed to utilize that sz’s naval base to build ships in the Red Sea? I know the rules on page 12 clearly say the IC & NB need to be in the same territory, but I thought that maybe this question didn’t come up in testing. It would be silly for the UK to build a second NB for sz64 to drop ships there.

3. If using paratroops does the bomber(s) get to participate in the battle (roll at 8 or less). Or is it drop bombs or drop troops can’t do both? Have thought about allowing bombers to participate at a lower value (maybe roll at 5 or less?)

4. Just to clarify, Russian partisans are placed on the board at the beginning of Russia’s turn right, so if they already have one partisan in that territory from the turn before you just replace it with a Russian inf that can be used in combat immediately or NCM . Just wanted to make sure that it wasn’t done during mobilize units (end of Russia’s turn)

5. Page 16 (and on the set-up cards), the last sentence of Russia’s Sleeping Bear says “If Russia is at war with Japan, Russia can attack Germany and Italy at the beginning of turn five”. So if Russia is rolling low numbers and hasn’t yet got to 48 production on their 4th turn, all they have to do is DOW on Japan at the beginning of turn 5 and it allows them to also DOW on Germany & Italy turn 5? Or is this stipulation only if Japan starts hostilities and DOW with the Russians first. Page 26 leads me to believe Japan has to provoke war w/Russia for the Soviets to start the war in Europe on turn 5.

6. Russia pg 26, says Russian can DOW Poland, Baltic States, Finland and any strict neutral not in Europe. Page 30 also has a one liner under #12 Strict Neutrals that says: While Nations are not at war, units that are moved must end their turn in their own territories or in a sz next to an original territory. I know this applies to the US (it is noted in the US political section on pg 28), and I would guess that the Russians would be bound by it too. So does Russia need to break neutrality to activate or invade pro and strict neutrals in the Mid East or Mongolia? A DOW w/Japan would lift Russia’s neutrality and allow the Soviets access to pro & strict neutrals that aren’t in Europe then. Also when Russia is at war with Japan only, can they move their navy away from Russian territory?

7. I like the new relationship between the Dutch and FEC. It should keep the DEI off limits to Japan unless they want to go to war w/FEC (UK) right away and boost the US production.

7b) About pro & strict neutrals, their units and ships.  So take the Dutch, if Germany captures Holland G1, then the DEI all become FEC, but the ground units remain Dutch and can’t move (only def). If the UK (or Anz) NCM over will the Dutch units become UK like any other pro allied ground unit?

7c) I like getting the dice involved like you do with the Vichy. Once Germany captures Holland ships in sz 88 (off Dutch NG) are rolled for. If a 1-2 is rolled that ship becomes German?, or can they give it to the Japanese? Does it stay in that sz, or can it be moved to a friendly Japanese NB or fleet? If a 9-12 is rolled then that ship escapes capture and stays in sz88 because of the naval base that is there. That NB would now be owned by the FEC, so you would swap out the Dutch ship in favor of an FEC ship?.

7d) When a coastal ship joins the enemy or friendly navies does the coastal tag comes off or is it just stuck where moved the rest of the game in the same sz. Can a coastal ship be moved along a coastline to def in an adjacent sz. A coastal ship would still be swapped out in the color of the power that ends up with it.

@WILD:

Have a few questions, or comments. Some may have been addressed before (apologies).

1. Kinda surprised to see no Denmark straight rule when you have both the Turkish and Gibraltar straights now in the game. Thought Denmark would control passage in or out of the Baltic (between sz17 & sz18). Was it just thought to give Germany too much protection? The Denmark straight should be in the rules.

2a) If you have a coastal IC, can you build a naval base and mobilize ships in the same turn. Or would you need to build the naval base in one turn, and mobilize ships in the next turn. The Naval base needs to be built first.

2b) Say UK builds a minor IC in Cairo. Cairo starts with a naval base in sz 47, so you could build ships in the Med (no problem). Upper Egypt also has a naval base that services sz 64 (adjacent to Cairo), are you allowed to utilize that sz’s naval base to build ships in the Red Sea? I know the rules on page 12 clearly say the IC & NB need to be in the same territory, but I thought that maybe this question didn’t come up in testing. It would be silly for the UK to build a second NB for sz64 to drop ships there. You bring up a good point. We may look at situations like this where the Naval bases need to be tied to a specific land zone also. For the record the naval base for Cairo is in the Med (SZ47)

3. If using paratroops does the bomber(s) get to participate in the battle (roll at 8 or less). Or is it drop bombs or drop troops can’t do both? Have thought about allowing bombers to participate at a lower value (maybe roll at 5 or less?)No, bombers dropping Para troopers return to base after AA roll.

4. Just to clarify, Russian partisans are placed on the board at the beginning of Russia’s turn right, so if they already have one partisan in that territory from the turn before you just replace it with a Russian inf that can be used in combat immediately or NCM . Just wanted to make sure that it wasn’t done during mobilize units (end of Russia’s turn) Yes

5. Page 16 (and on the set-up cards), the last sentence of Russia’s Sleeping Bear says “If Russia is at war with Japan, Russia can attack Germany and Italy at the beginning of turn five”. So if Russia is rolling low numbers and hasn’t yet got to 48 production on their 4th turn, all they have to do is DOW on Japan at the beginning of turn 5 and it allows them to also DOW on Germany & Italy turn 5? Or is this stipulation only if Japan starts hostilities and DOW with the Russians first. Page 26 leads me to believe Japan has to provoke war w/Russia for the Soviets to start the war in Europe on turn 5. This was put in to help Russia get into the war faster if they were rolling low numbers, so Yes.

6. Russia pg 26, says Russian can DOW Poland, Baltic States, Finland and any strict neutral not in Europe. Page 30 also has a one liner under #12 Strict Neutrals that says: While Nations are not at war, units that are moved must end their turn in their own territories or in a sz next to an original territory. I know this applies to the US (it is noted in the US political section on pg 28), and I would guess that the Russians would be bound by it too. So does Russia need to break neutrality to activate or invade pro and strict neutrals in the Mid East or Mongolia? A DOW w/Japan would lift Russia’s neutrality and allow the Soviets access to pro & strict neutrals that aren’t in Europe then. Also when Russia is at war with Japan only, can they move their navy away from Russian territory? Russia is technically not at war if attacking just neutral countries. If Russia declares war on Japan, Russia may move its Navy without restrictions.

7. I like the new relationship between the Dutch and FEC. It should keep the DEI off limits to Japan unless they want to go to war w/FEC (UK) right away and boost the US production.

7b) About pro & strict neutrals, their units and ships.  So take the Dutch, if Germany captures Holland G1, then the DEI all become FEC, but the ground units remain Dutch and can’t move (only def). If the UK (or Anz) NCM over will the Dutch units become UK like any other pro allied ground unit? Yes, unless you want to continue to use Dutch units. FEC still get the IPC’s

7c) I like getting the dice involved like you do with the Vichy. Once Germany captures Holland ships in sz 88 (off Dutch NG) are rolled for. If a 1-2 is rolled that ship becomes German?, or can they give it to the Japanese? Does it stay in that sz, or can it be moved to a friendly Japanese NB or fleet? If a 9-12 is rolled then that ship escapes capture and stays in sz88 because of the naval base that is there. That NB would now be owned by the FEC, so you would swap out the Dutch ship in favor of an FEC ship?. If the ships in the DEI are rolled for and become axis, they would be replaced with Japanese ships and moved to the nearest japanese or axis base.

7d) When a coastal ship joins the enemy or friendly navies does the coastal tag comes off or is it just stuck where moved the rest of the game in the same sz. Can a coastal ship be moved along a coastline to def in an adjacent sz. A coastal ship would still be swapped out in the color of the power that ends up with it.The ship should stay coastal.

Thanks for the above clarifications Tigerman. I know you were also looking at some possible restrictions for Japanese naval movement around the US west coast before DOW. Was this abandoned, or are you still considering something. I know it would be harder to set-up a surprise attack against the US if they retreat to their own shores, or even through the Panama Canal. Just wondered what you guy’s turned up through testing some restrictions?

Also additional clarification quoted from above post:

7d) When a coastal ship joins the enemy or friendly navies does the coastal tag comes off or is it just stuck where moved the rest of the game in the same sz. Can a coastal ship be moved along a coastline to def in an adjacent sz. A coastal ship would still be swapped out in the color of the power that ends up with it.The ship should stay coastal.

About coastal ships (ss & bb), after you roll to find out their fate (which side they join, or are scuttled), are you allowed to move them 1 time to a friendly port or navy, then they remain coastal, or do they stay in their original sz?

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?