must be hard for a cow to see itself in a processed shape, plus the cheese, plus your little farm friend in the shape of strips. mmm strips of pigs.
He can probably take comfort from knowing there is probably little actual beef in that product…
For knowing 2 people who worked at Wendys, they actually prepare the patties on location using fresh ground beef. That might or might not have been frozen is not the point :mrgreen:
Im so happy to hear people asking for official endorsement of my setups.
I would love for larry to say something about them.
The only thing he did say about it was
“damage already on factories and already damaged battleships, thats neat, shows the war has progressed”
Or something like that.
What I would like to hear is
“me and Krieg will give it a shot”
Set it up last night. I agree Germany a little understrengthed on the Eastern front. Otherwise I like it. USA has Solomons and a fight brewing in the South Pacific. Like it.
Yeah its a good idea- making the 42 and all but it definitely needs some adjusting and playtesting…way too few pieces. The Axis are way to thinned out and spread out. In Global, the map really works against the Axis and when you spread them out even further it just magnifies that descrepency. I still don’t understand why Oztea’s version was used. It has enough pieces needed and it also starts with everyone at war. :? :? :?
My setups have too many pieces for larry’s liking.
The reason I have so much stuff on the board is so you are cautious. If you have 500 ipcs worth of starting units, but only collect 50 each turn, you have to be careful how you play because you will expend yourself.
Kind of realistic. Powers started with lots of men and material, but couldn’t replace them overnight.
Larry just transplanted the 1942 2nd edition units onto the big board. He liked to keep the ratios of units within those bounds.
If I could do anything to make my setup better (historical edition or whatever)
Id add contested territories (all combats last THREE rounds, not just one, even Naval combat)
Ports wouldn’t have mines, but a port with an AA gun would provide air cover
Night bombing: bombers get -1 instead of +2 damage, but are immune to interception.
Artillery fire defensively during amphibious invasions
It kind of sounds like you want to turn Global 40 into 1914.
To be honest, I kind of like the idea of contested territories. Three rounds might be a bit much. Most games that I have played, most battles are decided within 3 rounds. Strangely enough, it seems to be the biggest battles (like a final German assault on Moscow) and the smallest battles (like an infantry/artillery attacking 1 or 2 infantry) that go for more than 3 rounds. The big ones are obvious but with the little ones, sometimes you seem to roll and roll but just don’t get hits. One thing about this is it’s a good way to deny your opponent the IPCs for that territory even if you can’t get them yourself. Suppose there is a big German invasion of Eastern US that goes for more than 3 rounds. Germany effectively denies 20 IPCs from the USA’s income, if the US can’t make it uncontested. So if both are making roughly 80 IPCs per turn with NOs and all, then Germany will still get 80 while the US drops to 60 for that turn.
This brings up a couple of questions: 1>If the Eastern US becomes contested, does that affect the US Continental NO? It’s 10 IPCs for control of Western US, Central US and Eastern US. If the Eastern US has become contested, it’s no longer under US control, right?
2>If the Eastern US becomes contested, can the US still use the facilities there (air base, naval base, Major IC)? I would think not, particularly the IC. If that territory is being fought over and has an enemy presence, I wouldn’t think you could still deploy new units there.
One other question about the Night Bombing. I understand the immunity to interceptors and the lower bombing damage. What about AA fire? Shouldn’t it also be reduced to show the reduction in accuracy at night? Perhaps you have to get two "1"s to hit one plane.
wow guys,
seriously, who cares who made the friggin map variant
judge the game by how it plays, not who made it
Remember, this 1942 scenario needs to be completed within a reasonable tournament block allowance, something 1940 Global can’t do. I’m sure this is why the number of units may need be as many as some were hoping, which is fine by me. I can’t wait to try the scenario with my group. I won’t comment on it’s balance until then.
It does seem like it was a bit rushed, as several (somewhat glaring) errors have already been fixed
Most notably turn order and incorrect starting IPCs
Krieg has posted on Larry’s site with the correct set up(no change) incomes(amended) and turn order.
Germany is no longer last. It is 5th, ahead of the UK, followed by Italy.
Here is the corrected game setup as provided on Larry’s site:
So it’s unplayable on tripleA without modifying the turn order
How easy/difficult is changing the turn order on tripleA?
Before this change it was ok. I skipped Germany as they were last and started with Russia.
Not sure if it needs one of the designers to sort it out now.
I hope it can be resolved.
Had you noticed the set up was slightly different?
@Uncrustable:
So it’s unplayable on tripleA without modifying the turn order
How easy/difficult is changing the turn order on tripleA?
I’m no expert, but I think it is no change in tripleA itself but “only” a modification of the game.xml (part of the map files).
Man, germany calls for 14 tank models and i have 12….
Thats what comes with the game right? I didn’t lose any peices?
Dont you have grey chips?
Dont you have grey chips?
Obviously he does. The problem is that there are 14 TERRITORIES with tanks.
Yes, i see why this wasn’t released to the public and only for tournaments.
I checked and i have the correct number of tank models. This sucks, I got to borrow from other games now.
