IC's

Nice one!

Here’s a quick thought: 0.5 I.P.C.s might work in the same way 12 sided die made the game better over 6 sided die.  The more complex the game becomes, the more intricate the mechanics of it need to be.  I’ve been wanting to use 1/2 I.P.C.s for a while, but I haven’t tested that because all I get to do is play G40 now.  The less practical alternative would be to double the I.P.C.s for everything so that 1 I.P.C.s becomes 0.5 I.P.C.s (much like inflation with Fiat Currencies, such as our dollar).  I’ll post here again once I give this whole thing more thought.

The rules state that Japan can only build a minor in Siam. So is this unlike the axis minor rule with Germany and Romania for instance? The reason for the question is that Siam would qualify for major due to its value ie Romania to Germany. Also, does this mean that Japan can not build anywhere else? For example, on the tt it starts with on the mainland?

Yes.

YES.

Because they are at war with an Axis power (Germany).

@Chris_Henry:

@Tigerman77:

Europe zones go to Britain and pacific/Asian zones go to the FEC

I hadn’t really thought about this being an issue, honestly. While that makes sense in terms of figuring out the game, and is how A&A works too, it’s funny that it’s almost an exception.

By that I mean, what if ANZAC takes a territory in Africa or Europe? They get the IPP’s, don’t they? But if FEC does it, it automatically goes to the UK?
[/quote

[color=red]answer

Yes  Anzac gets it if its an Italian territory or German. If Anzac takes back an allies territory its considered liberated and goes back to the original owner if they still
Control there Capital.
Sjelso is posting old posts and its getting confusing. Tigermans reply is either for his 39 game or his answer pertains to HBG 39 1st Edition game.

Hi, Ben,

Yeah, Wikipedia plays a big part in my research.  But I stumble across other websites as I’m hunting for things also.  Sometimes I find declassified official documents from the time.  I also use other games in my collection, like War in Flames and Battlewagon, where the designers did the research, and came to their own conclusions about how to fudge things.  I used to be in Military Intelligence when I was active duty army.  I spent six years at NSA (“In God we trust.  All others we monitor”)  :wink:  So I developed the habit of confirming intelligence from multiple sources whenever possible.  I’m still in the National Guard, actually.  But I switched my MOS to MP so I didn’t have to drive so far for drills.

Midnight,

Good job on the research.  Every time I start to do it for land forces, I get distracted by all the different sources, and how they use different methods for listing things.  Yeah, with the way A&A works, where the infantry of one country is equal to the infantry of every other country (unless you are using the elite units in Global ’39), then you have to reflect differences in troop and equipment quality by using different ratios to represent one unit.

One idea I’ve toyed with is using the same ratio for everyone’s infantry, (like 1 for every three divisions) but then reflecting the differences in firepower by assigning different ratios for artillery.  For instance, at the start maybe Germany gets an artillery unit for every 2 infantry, and France gets one for every 5 infantry, or something along those lines.  The problem there, of course, is that the French (and Russians) really really liked artillery, and it made up a bigger percentage of their overall forces.  So it would not be entirely satisfying from a historical perspective.  For the same reasons, I am reluctant to just start them off with a bunch of SS units.  Although I suppose I could just not call them SS units.  But I’d know.  I’D KNOW, and it would bug me  :-D

Revisions in progress that will have some slightly different setup for neutrals. Not a game changer, just better. The Rules will be better written also.