G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

Howdy folks. I’ve got a series of simple house rules that add a little bit of historicity & complexity to the game’s political situation without requiring new pieces, trackers, loads of exceptions & things to remember, etc. They’re intended to each be a module drop-in addition to a set of rules. I’ve playtested these roughly 3-5 times each & am looking for additional feedback. I make no claims to uniqueness or creativity–these were constructed with LOTS of taking from the community & as such, I’m offering them back to the community.

Here’s one of my favorite: Slightly Scarier China:

China may place infantry on any originally Chinese territory which has no enemy land units on it. Only as many units may be placed in a territory as twice the IPC value of that territory. China never purchases Artillery, it is given by a modified Burma Road National Bonus: 3 IPCs & +1 Arty in Szechwan if Burma Road is open. Chinese units may go anywhere in China as well as:
Korea, Burma, Shan State, Siam, French Indochina, and Hong Kong. They may never collect income from these additional territories, even if they control them.

First of all, to clarify for everybody: the Chinese Coast is originally-Chinese! Japan just starts with it; read the rules.

This is just like any of the million Chinese Guerilla rules out there. Japan’s got to keep an infantry on every territory or Chinese dudes pop up behind the lines. In practice, we found that to be actually too powerful for China, and made it impossible for Japan to hold any part of the continent for more than 5 turns if they wanted to adopt a Pacific strategy.

While it was fun with an aggressive Japan, and accurately represented the way you had you throw money into China to make any minor progress (you’d be surprised how much Chinese guerilla placement slows you down after 2-3 turns, if you haven’t played with it yet), it didn’t represent well the other way the pendulum swung–it was too easy for China to seize the initiative & end the forever war.

As a result, we’ve found that forcing China to distribute its builds hampers its ability to form doomstacks. Additionally, forcing offensive units to be shipped from the south really makes it hard for it to press the advantage in the north without Soviet help. We found this feels a lot better.

One note: we typically play with a “Coiled Japan” setup that gives Kiangsi and Kwangsi to China & moves the Japanese units there further north, representing a few months earlier than the OOB setup. This also really slows Japanese progress & makes a J1/J2 closure of the Burma road impossible, ruling a classic Calcutta crush out entirely. If you don’t do this, I’d recommend removing a Japanese infantry from each of the coastal territories (not Manchuria or Korea).

This rule pairs well with:

200th Division (swap a Yunnan Inf for an irreplaceable Chinese tank) Gobi Wasteland (Kansu, Tsinghai, and Sikang have no economic value) Can’t Send Tanks Over the Desert (the border between west China & the USSR may only be traversed by aircraft and infantry)

Overall, this is a big swing in the Allies’ favor, probably about 10-15 IPCs worth of bidding. The Gobi Wasteland rule might be required if the extra rounds of Burma income prove too much for your Japan player to overcome.

@imperious-leader said in Global 1940 Fixed Units Variants:

@gen-manstein right, just off the top of my head.Baron M. could collaborate

Barons to busy. We don’t need his collaborate.

@nubnumber1
Correct. The airbase rules only apply to the units on that land space - they do not apply to units in adjacent spaces.

@magnum I’m not yet convinced that letting them pick what they want, and potentially the same thing, is a problem. If anything, this will give them the opportunity to try out different strategies, involving research, and see how they work.

Sorry for not getting back to you sooner, but it’s been a crazy year.

I know that there is evidence of Dutch transports, and I’m not refuting that. I’m simply stating that the addition of a transport makes the new Dutch units too powerful on the game board, and grossly unbalances the game in favor of the Allies, which is a bad thing.

My solution, after play testing, is to give the Axis some units to balance it out, and I’ve edited my original post to reflect this.

@Caesar-Seriona said in G40 Benelux (Belgium/Netherlands/Luxembourg) Setup:

@JustLuthor:

@Herr:

I like the general idea though of course it would have to be carefully balanced. As for the units, I’m not much in favor of the tank in Scotland, for realism’s sake. The Dutch had one small tank at home. The Belgians did have a significant number of tanks but evacuating them to the UK was evidently impossible. Having two Benelux infantry units there is already more than enough compared to the French who were far more numerous.
Dutch New Guinea might have an infantry unit, though. Dutch resistance continued throughout the war there, and the Japanese never completely conquered that territory.

I can’t find it now, but in my research, I came across a Dutch tank unit raised in England after the fall of the Netherlands. For balance’s sake, maybe it should be 1 Artillery to represent Luxembourg’s limited contribution to the allied war effort. And maybe it should be only one infantry in England for both balance, and scale.

I couldn’t find any Dutch 1940 Order of Battle for Dutch New Guinea. I only found references to DNG being reinforced after Japan declared war. This is the best historical argument for a Dutch transport in the Pacific, though I still feel it should be up to ANZAC to ferry Dutch units around for balance’s sake, which is empirically more important than historical accuracy.

Another reason I don’t stress accuracy, is that it’s a slippery slope that eventually leads to completely revamping the game; not just the setup, but the map, and game mechanics as well. I would certainly like to do this for my own amusement, but it’s hard enough to get a game of Global going. I don’t want to compound that problem by creating an even more complicated game with 40-something countries, resources, trade agreements, diplomatic agreements, governments in exile, technology, a dozen new units, prison camps, espionage, sabotage, food rationing on the home front, and the Bretton Woods Conference.

Though I would totally play that game.

From my understanding of Luxembourg war effort against the Wehrmacht was the fact their nation did not have a military and only their capital city had some kind of defense and it was the cities police force that fought and surrendered (if I remember correctly) after a day of fighting. So as far as I know, no military campaign of any sort came from Luxembourg.

The Luxembourg government in exile did field a small artillery troop attached to the 1st Belgian Field Artillery Battery (specifically Troop C). They fought in Northern France, and Belgium.

Canada is a minor power because its military operation is minor overall and heavily dependent on US and UK. Canada’s only major operation in Asia was reinforcing Hong Kong, being an auxiliary force in Africa and committed in Europe so they were pretty centered in the conflict.

We played Global 40 today (6 player game) with the following turn order.

Russia non com far east forces
All Axis go except Italy)
All allies go except France
All Axis go
All Allies go
Then switch off from then on. 
All the normal rules applies as to who can can-opener for whom and order of non com etc.

On the plus side, we found that it did not change the game play or balance which we wanted to avoid.  It was also fun from the standpoint of the whole team being “on” together and “off” together.   
On the down side, however, it also did not speed up play much.  Of course, we had a couple of new players, and I think it would might have saved significant time with more experienced player.  So, it is something we might do again, but not because it saved all that much time.

@toblerone77:

@knp7765:

I think destroyers should be able to bombard @ 2. In fact, I think all surface warships should have that ability.
The only thing that worries me is if destroyers can bombard @ 2 plus their ASW abilities and cheap price, that will start a new wave of people saying “Cruisers aren’t worth buying”.

Well FWIW I don’t mind adding some firepower especially if everyone can do it. I’m working with using the bunkers from HBG to have major and minor bunker complexes that soak hits even on islands. It really just depends on how far you want to diverge from OOB rules and what other units are going to come in to play.

A simple rule could be that all surface warships no matter their type boost +1 on a 1:1 ratio with land units for one round, and tweak it to your liking from there.Â

Interesting extrapolation.
It could be used by cruiser and BB in addition to their basic bombardment.
We can even consider more boosting power toward BB.
Cool. :-)