Anniversay Edition 1942 setup on 1941 map 1.0

@sniffemonster The First edition of the Classic version had the Commander in Chief Rules, any Allied nation could combine together with another Nation to Attack together- that Rule was done away with in the 2nd edition Classic version!!!

Here is 12 of n for discussion of my Classic House Rules

So, we have a big pile of new units and new rules, how shall we set up the board? I propose the following new setup for A&A Classic.

List of abbreviations:
ACav - Armored Cavalry
AirT - Air Transport
AKA - (sea) Transport
BB - Battleship
Bmbr - Bomber
CA - Cruiser
CV - Aircraft Carrier
Ftr - Fighter
HArt - Heavy Artillery
Para - Paratrooper
SS - Submarine
Trpr - Trooper

This setup assumes that you are playing with the Cruisers from Post 1 (links to relevant posts added below), the Paratroopers and Air Transports from Post 2, the Armored Cavalry and Troopers from Post 3, and the Heavy Artillery from Post 4. The setup for Armored Cavalry, Troopers, and Heavy Artillery is ‘inspired’ by Ralph Boerke’s original setup for his Armored Cavalry, Troopers, and Heavy Artillery. This setup will place 1 Paratrooper and 1 Air Transport in the capital territories all nations, Germany will receive 1 additional Paratrooper and Air Transport in Rome (Southern Europe). This setup also assumes use of the “Boats Valve Fix” (BVF) proposed by D. A. Harrell from the mists of A&A history (I read about it from the re-post on Thrasher’s A&A page, which should give some history for those who remember Thrasher…). Also, this setup assumes the use of the variable British Sub setup. Furthermore, all CVs will receive a full complement of aircraft (2 Fighters) at setup; all sea zones with Transports or CVs will receive 1 Cruiser at setup, and all sea zones with Battleships will receive 1 (additional) Transport at setup.

@Boat:

In short, the Boat Valve Fix changes three things about Classic A&A - 1) optional “No Attack by Russia” made mandatory, 2) increase the number of German Subs in the Atlantic (off Western Europe) from 1 to 4, 3) increase the number of Japanese Transports in the Philippines Sea Zone from 1 to 4.

First, setup the game as normal. Nothing will be removed from the original setup. Then, add the noted pieces to the following territories as listed below:

Union of Soviet Socialists Republics
Russia (territory of) - 1 Trpr, 1 ACav, 1 HArt, 1 Para, and 1 AirT
Karelia - 1 CA with SS and AKA already there
Sov. F. East - 1 Trpr and 1 ACav

Union of Soviet Socialists Republics

Germany
Germany (territory of) - 2 Trpr, 2 ACav, 1 HArt, 1 Para, 1 AirT, 1 CA and 1 SS with SS and AKA already in the Baltic
Eastern Europe - 1 HArt
Ukraine - 1 ACav and 1 HArt
Southern Europe - 1 Para, 1 AirT, 1 CA and 1 AKA added to the BB and AKA already at sea
Western Europe - 1 ACav, 1 HArt, and 3 SS added to the 1 SS already at sea
Libya - 1 ACav

Germany

United Kingdom
United Kingdom (territory of) - 1 Trpr, 1 HArt, 1 Para, 1 AirT, 1 CA and 1 AKA added to the BB and AKA already at sea
Eastern Canada - 1 CA with AKA already there
India - 1 Trpr and 1 CA with AKA already there
Gibraltar - 1 AKA added to the BB already at sea
Egypt - 1 ACav, also - (The UK player has the option to move the 1 UK SS already off the coast of Egypt from the Med to the Red Sea (aka, the other side of the Suez Canal) at setup. Once USSR starts taking its turn, choice is set for that game.)

United Kingdom

Empire of Japan
Japan (territory of) - 1 Trpr, 1 ACav, 1 HArt, 1 Para, 1 AirT, and 1 CA, 1 SS, and 1 AKA with BB and AKA already at sea
Manchuria - 1 Trpr and 1 ACav
Fr. In. Burma - 1 ACav
Phil. I’s - 1 CA and 3 AKA added to the AKA already at sea
Kwangtung - 1 ACav
Caro. I’s - 1 CA, 1 Ftr, and 1 AKA with BB, CV, and Ftr already at sea
Solo. I’s - 1 SS added to the 1 SS already at sea

Empire of Japan

United States of America
Eastern US - 2 Trpr, 1 Para, 1 AirT, and 1 CA with AKA already at sea
Western US - 2 Trpr, 1 ACav, 1 HArt, 1 CA, 1 SS, and 1 AKA with BB and AKA already at sea
Hawaii - 1 CA, and 1 Ftr with SS, CV, and Ftr already at sea

United States of America

Posts
Post 1 - Cruisers - www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41100.0
Post 2 - Paratroopers and Air Transports - www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41101.0
Post 3 - Armored Cavalry and Troopers - www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41157.0
Post 4 - Heavy Artillery - www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41158.0

One more post (Neutral Countries and what to be done with them), and I think I’ll have posted about all of my personal rule collection for Classic. Looking forward to wrapping all of this up and putting together a comprehensive rule book of changes.

-Midnight_Reaper

@drummerinheat:

where can i find it? :?

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30919.0[]]http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30919.0](]]http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30919.0[url][/url])

Awesome! thanks a lot!

I’ve only played Global 1940 about 5 times but i’m looking forward to play this setup! Lots of new options to try!

I prefer to think along the lines of many fewer, large sea zones. Ships of both sides can co-exist in them, and must make search (or intercept) rolls to initiate combat. Land based fighters cannot attack ships.

Here’s a link to some. Although these are made for triplea you can obviously play them on the board as well. You might want some custom ipc markers for the TTs with different values though. I’m in the process of revamping these so they have their own zips. You won’t need to replace the whole global zip that way.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35578.0

Here’s one that changes Russia’s NOs

Russian NOs.zip

Other than the Russian bomber added to the setup, I highly doubt any of my group will want house rules for a game that we just started playing… especially with my history of changing the Global rules… LOL. Nice idea, but I probably won’t be able to introduce house rules until my group gets board of the game in a year or 2 (maybe even 3).

I guess the answer depends on what your reasons are for choosing a 1916 set-up.  Are you choosing it because you’re trying to replicate the situation that existed in 1916, for reasons of historical interest?  If so, having contested territories is probably the way to go, since it would be authentic to do so.  Or are you choosing it because it introduces variety into the game, meaning that it gives you a different starting point than the 1914 one of the official game?  If so, then you should probably avoid having contested territories because, as you said, they players won’t have much choice about where to fight.

Keep in mind that, as Barbara Tuchman noted it in her book The Zimmerman Telegram, many generals as late as 1917 still weren’t questioning their basic approach to waging war in a trench warfare environment.  As she put it, their thinking was still focussed on where along the front they should butt their heads next, not on whether they should do it or on questioning their fundamental concepts of how they should do it.  That eventually changed with such innovations as the development of infiltration tactics on the German side and the mass use of tanks on the Allied side – but in 1916, generals still thought primarily in terms of huge, long, grinding and virtually static battles of attrition at specific points along the Western front.  In a sense, it was the entire front that was “contested”, and it was along its whole length that the two sides were locked; it’s simply that some specific points of it were, at various times, contested at an exceptionally high level of intensity.

In some respects, it even didn’t matter very much whether these huge battles took place at Point X of the front rather than at Point Y, since one stretch of shell-blasted mud looks pretty much like any other one…at least from an objective point of view.  Subjectively, however, some of those stretches did have symbolic value, which is precisely why they were targeted for attack or defended so tenaciously.  For example, I think that the Ypres sector was a small segment that Belgian soil that the Allies managed to hold throughout the war, and that as such it was considered highly symbolic.  Similarly, Verdun was targetted by Germany in part because it had historic importance and therefore was seen as an area that France was “bound to defend” with everything it had, which was precisely what Germany hoped because they conceived of the Verdun offensive as a means of “bleeding France white.”  So in deciding how much latitude you want to give players about where they can choose to fight on the game board, you may want to consider what factors might make a difference (and how much of a difference) in their minds about whether they’d like to fight here rather than there.

I have noticed there are about 20 threads on this topic.  I am bumping this as it was popular months ago.