G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread

@all-encompassing-goose

Hi, these rules are cool. I did not base my rules off of this. This was developed independently.

A different take on “free for all”. Being able to make alliances though means it should be called “shifting alliances” rather than “free for all”.

@all-encompassing-goose

Crazy!

You have some of the most interesting ideas on this forum.

I would only have the two boards fighting each other change and the part where the boards don’t wrap around, but not the Panama Canal or national objective rules-just a few questions and recommendations:

So I assume that West India is given back to UK Europe, and Western Canada is given back to UK Pacific-is that right? Thank you!

Is there a capital for the Soviet Far Eastern territories?

You might need to make a new map, as the proportions on the map do not allow for your idea to work effectively, unless they are already explained before playing, but that might be tough, especially with the sea zones.

For national objectives, change all references for the respective powers from Allies or Axis to the respective map alliance (of course, this means Japan get all their national objectives, but it also means that Italy and Germany get most of their national objectives as well).

Finally, all Soviet national objectives should be given to the Europe side (how the Soviets will get their Berlin national objective is if they liberate it, there is still the first time rule), and all Pacific related national objectives should go to the US Pacific, and all Europe related national objectives should go to Europe US. This assumes that all national objectives are for the global version. The 10 IPCs for the US control Eastern, Central, and Western United States is split evenly between US Europe and Pacific

@SS-GEN
I mentionned the OOB ways in beginning of my last post.

heh heh that ought to keep a guy busy

Good Action Argo ! Sounds way cool. Do you plan on making a triplea version ?

I think it might make more sense to just return Australia to a single territory rather than two.

I have tried games before testing the idea of splitting islands across sea zones (basically a reverse definition) it has the effect of making bombardments more significant, and fleets less likely to engage on attack (they tend to camp defend  relying instead on amphibious.) Splitting islands also increases fighter movement in a somewhat overpowered way, so you have to be careful. I think with an interesting starting unit placement you can accomplish a lot. Australia as a single territory would have greater reach for any fighters landed there, and the scale of the territory warrants it a bit more then solomons.

I think the best approach is to tilt Japan slightly counter clockwise at the southern tip of the island to make more room for ships. And then put the alignment for the smaller islands based of the relative distance between Australia Hawaii and the three major island territories (East Indies, Borneo, and Philippines). I will play up the focus on the key islands (though some of those chains were involved Palau and the Marianas and such. On the whole though I think the stepping stones out of W. USA would be the most interesting way to change the Pacific dynamic. Force both players to defend their coastlines instead of drop south so easily with everything.

Will redraft it sometime on Tuesday when I get a break from work.

Have a nice memorial day

@guy:

so i’m assuming alpha +3.9 NAs have no place in this game right?

just thought i’d clarify

No they dont ;)

Collect money for the territory’s you own and nothing more

@wittmann:

Knp: I agree.

Ditto here!  I hope this really can be a fresh start this year for FMG, for sure, and I too wish I had a boatload of money I could invest.  I did make a modest little order to show my support, though, and to express tangibly that “no hard feelings” on my part.  Just remember, we can forgive a lot, but if you don’t tell us what’s going on for months at a time, we don’t know if we should even risk making orders for “in stock” items, as we might fear the company’s going out of business and can’t fulfill them.  So please, please keep us posted… And just as important, is not more so, keep in touch with Coach!  And please coordinate with him more closely in the future when you’re ready to roll out more new products… (…last I checked we were headed for a situation where we were going to have 3 different companies doing a Tiger I and none doing a Panzer IV, for instance…)