US economy in global scenario vs. Pacific or Europe

Hello all. Just wondering if there are any custom setup charts for the Global 1942 scenario? I have the printout but was looking for setup charts to customize what I have. Thanks in advance.

@Young:

The split is less confusing because they are different coloured units with their own nation and turn sequence, so it’s the same as ANZAC infantry in Egypt with UK pieces.

Lol. I do own physical copies of each game but you can tell how often I’ve played them :)

You are missing the large amount of UK forces in the middle east already.  Usually Uk has persia by round 2 and is setting up to take Iraq, so it will be a constant fight.  Russia might even send units down from the north.

Japan is m fav country to play and like many other players I try not to get into static purchaces,  as its easy to counter.  I employ this strat to quickly balance the navy between the US and Japan, forcing US to build more on the pacific side.  Generally the first 2 or 3 turns i play with japan I purchace transports and ground units, I try to get as many troops to the main land so by turn 3  you have so many troops you can afford to slowly filter planes off the mainland to newly bought carriers.  I also load the land up because I find when I go to take the DEI this usually weakens my mainland leaving openings for China an UK.

after leningrad falls, you need to transports, so that whilst you are holding in ukraine, you are REINFORCING the eastern front from Leningrad everyturn.

And on a good day, if the allies aren’t paying attention, sometimes from within the baltic, you get to sack England, and they don’t even see it coming.

Still fairly new to these forums. Before I begin, I should say our group plays alpha .2 rules, with the exception of no scramble, kamakazis, and we use original strategic bombing (no interceptors). Our group has decided that having the U.S. spend $100+ in just the Atlantic is too good. Also, it seems kind of “unhistorical” if you will. So we split it up giving some of the NOs to East and West United States. They act similarly to UK London and UK India, where war with one is war with the other, same attack move blah blah blah. I was curious if anyone else has tried this?

Oh and just a random afterthought, how do you guys play canals? This is how we play it:

No matter the amount of spaces before entering a canal, you must stop in the SZ before it. Then, on your next turn, the ships may move through, but only a single space. Then normal movement from there on out.

Another version we play is this. No matter the amount of spaces before entering a canal, you must stop in the SZ before it. Then, on your next turn, the ships may move through it at any length the ship could normally move.

We do this for two reasons. One is to keep the U.S. Pacific stuff, in the Pacific. The other is to slow ships moving up from Africa into the Med. Thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Thanks!

it is better.

ANZAC and UK should be allowed to fight together anyways.

It’s flexible.  You want to protect Wake and Guam enough that Japan has no realistic chance at taking them. Even falling back to Wake if needed.  If you start this out on J1 because Japan allows it and then they turn and go 100% against you, then yea, you probably would need to buy a destroyer and all aircraft for their scramble ability.  If they ignore you for a time and go to India, then you could do it for less.  Basically, I see them spending 38-41 ipc/round in the Pacific on the cheap side.  Some rounds they may spend more if the player sees it fit to do so.  The good thing about this is that once the war bonus kicks in, it may give you a chance to split your income almost 50/50 so that you aren’t totally ignoring either theater.