HBG Requests Input on New Pieces

No harm at all. I was just mentioning that they were the same ones. It’s easy to forget that the green pieces in the game aren’t actually the Americans, but rather the Allies who have retreated back to North America after losing WW2. I didn’t realize until you had posted your link that the Meteor was actually a British fighter.

1936 senario we are using the add 1$ to every landzone and double for original German house rule and Russia is free of Berlin fall declaration of war restrictions. This one is so bizarre we are continuing even though its 1946 by the calendar next turn.

Allies went for Japan first. Russia joined in and attacked allies for Chinese ownership. Us beat Japan down as a can opener. Then had Australia take all of Japan’s money and land (just because I wanted Australia to dominate the Pacific when America went with everything Atlantic). As a result Germany went sealion but was kicked out by uk when Russia attacked Germany. Italy has all of Africa and most of south America. While Germany is fighting with Russia. Its now a race, For the Atlantic and south Africa by US and Australia is taking China and Eastern Russia while eating up pieces of Africa, to liberate the UK its south African factory back. Both are out of position to attack Germany. Axis is using Italy as a screen similar to how the UK and French start the game, on the defensive to buy time, for Germany to focus on its only front Russia. French and Netherlands are eliminated they lost all possible capital locations on the same turn. When london was lost and Italy owned all Africa. Vichy was attacked to prevent funding the German war machine and became German aligned. Only allies way to attack Germany.

Honestly the income change, only changed our purchase power per turn but was virtually identical in ballance of income across all players.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38414.0

Has a few ideas I used for this exact issue. I’ve changed a few things since with the chips colours. It was a bit overwhelming at first.

Though over time I’ve started to buy or make some pieces to replace these chips from hbg. Occasionally they are out of stock on some stuff.  Some we used often and others we didn’t bother with. Torpedo boat destroyers for example were not worth it for us we just switched to destroyers for these at setup. For now….

HBG says you can play with global40 oob pieces. But a few items are nice to have extra.

Found it way cheaper to buy some units from hbg. The pieces from Pacific or Europe 40. Some are sold in a complete bag for a nation uk and usa most likely in stock. And spray paint any extra colours you want. Dutch orange, yellow comunist china and spain to augment the special units in the same colours i bought.

If money isn’t an issue I’d say call or email the folks at HBG and get everything you need there. They know their stuff and can assist you with the pieces and options required. Have had lots of communication with them. They are very good at getting back to you and assisting with your orders!

Thanks! Lots of good ideas. HGB has a ton of options but we didn’t want to ‘go all out’ on pieces until playing it through at least once. Since they’ll be releasing a supplemental set, I may wait.

I like the place markers idea and already made some. After T1, Germany has 5 units on Luxembourg – it can’t fit half of one unit.

I should’ve bought the 4x8 map :cry:  Even so, I think the map still needs another rev. Squish all those empty USSR zones east and make some more room for Europe. Not accurate but…

Pic of tiles. Labels from packs along with case.
There are extra colours here so we may either incorporate new types of  bases or change colour scheme with play testing.

2016-08-16 10.18.54.jpg

You meant “the Turkish part” of the map right? :p

I agree with your point Narvik.  You think the designers have a reasonable chance to consider that revision?

I do have a quick question for the creators brought up while discussing the minor axis powers in another thread:

If the Germans build a naval base on Romania can the Romanians (who don’t need an IC) build ships in the Black Sea to help protect an axis fleet, or do they only produce ground/air units in their capital (not ships next to it)? Using the same principle, are they allowed to build a ftr for a German (or Italian) carrier in the Black Sea? Obviously they would have to had saved some IPCs.

I believe this next part is still under review, any word yet?

This leads me to a 2nd question, say the Germans build a minor IC in both Romania, and Bulgaria, and a NB for Bulgaria (sz43 Black Sea). I know the Germans could build ships in the Black Sea from the Bulgarian IC w/NB, but would the same NB servicing sz43 also fill the requirement to allow for ships to be built from Germany’s Romanian IC adjacent to it? Can a NB from one territory service an IC from a different territory (for ship building) as long as they share the same sz, and are owned by the same power. This is also in question if UK builds an IC for Cairo which comes w/NB servicing the Med sz47 (allows you to build ships in sz47). Can the same Cairo IC (would also be adjacent to sz64) also build ships in the Red Sea using the Upper Egypt NB that services sz64 as long as they owned both Cairo & Upper Egypt?

Further more in a similar situation as above, can a NB in a territory of your ally serve the requirements for shipbuilding for an IC you own as long as they are adjacent to the same sz? Say the Italians take Holland and build a NB (sz 16). Would the Italian NB allow the Germans to drop ships into sz 16 from their adjacent major IC in W Germany?