[Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China

@Caesar-Seriona Waaaaaay too complicated, but sweet!

@taamvan said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:

@Caesar-Seriona Waaaaaay too complicated, but sweet!

Just for the fun of it, here’s a jump to the opposite end of the scale (meaning to something very simple). If you look at this section of my custom Global 1940 table, which uses as its default value the original status of China’s territories…

https://www.axisandallies.org/uploads/_imported_attachments/migrated/289190_8 Pacific Left Panel.jpg

…and expand the picture by clicking on it, you’ll notice that Shensi has Communist Chinese marker on it rather than a Nationalist one. That’s roughly the area (today’s Shaanxi) controlled by Mao after he ended up there in 1935 at the end of the Long March. If you want to set up a simple “communist block” in Global 1940 which would be historically credible and which wouldn’t be a major game-changer, make that area (and its sculpts) a ChiCom “micro-player” force controlled by the player who runs the Soviet Union. This would be a little bit like the way in which that the Soviet player already runs France (though on a much smaller scale), and it would also be a little bit like the oddball Flying Tiger unit in Global (a distinct unit with its own rules, and with the strange status of being an American unit that’s technically part of the Chinese Air Force, with the strangeness compounded by the fact that it’s the American player who runs China). I think that, from the point of view of historical accuracy, it should simply be an infantry force, and a fairly small one too; at most, I’d give it an artillery piece as extra firepower.

@CWO-Marc Yes, this is a very interesting idea–I’ve referred to turtling the upper leftmost China square as a “Long March Communist Redoubt”, even without using different pieces or any special rules.

And I didn’t mean to sound dismissive of it–i think its a good way to tweak the diplomacy of G40 and make 3 unique new teams. I think the problem (as you mentioned) is what happens when the players decide on their own Molotov Pact and Germany focuses on the allies while Russia builds up. It’d bust the diplomatic playout of G40.

So you dont need to reinvent the wheel, because as always, HBG has created a most comprehensive set of rules from which you can pick and choose. I like the general idea of GW36 it just sounds hopelessly impractical and complex to play. I think some of the ideas could be ported back into G40 much more simply (Winter war, Spanish CW, lend lease), but so do the HBG guys–you can play with as many or as few of their mods as you wish.

@Xlome_00 said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:

GW36’s complexity is precisely why I brought this question up as it pertains to G40 because it is too complex to get enough people to approach it. Perhaps incorporating Communist-Friendly neutrals, or create a '36 setup for the G40 board which pulls in some of the diplomatic elements from GW36?

Yes only a few play 36. I thought I saw here on site somebody doing that.
I know a few guys doing 39 for AA50. But would 36 work there. Definitely a lot to play around with. Could have a china word Lord battle and Spain civil war before game. Then just add outcome to 40 ? Maybe

@Xlome_00 said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:

GW36’s complexity is precisely why I brought this question up as it pertains to G40 because it is too complex to get enough people to approach it. Perhaps incorporating Communist-Friendly neutrals, or create a '36 setup for the G40 board which pulls in some of the diplomatic elements from GW36?

The answer would depend on two things: who the house rule is intended for, and what its basic objective is.

In terms of who the house rule is for, the simple case would be if it’s only intended for your own use and/or the use of your gaming group. In such a case, you have unlimited maneuvering room, plus the added advantage that you don’t need to worry about any dissenting viewpoints from anyone. The complicated case would be if it’s intended for use by the wider A&A gaming community. Those are the rocks on which countless house rule proposals have ended up wrecking themselves over the years because – as this discussion thread illustrates – A&A players have diverse opinions on such proposals. Diversity of opinion is a great and desirable thing, since it encourages creativity and individuality, but it tends to make it hard for most house rule proposals to gain broad acceptance; some of them do get widely adopted, but they’re the exceptions.

In terms of what your basic objective is, you’re in the best position to answer that question. If, for example, your basic objective is to play an A&A-type board game in which the Communist Block is a major military power in its own right and controls large areas of the map board right from the start, then you really have only two options: you either have to set the game in the Cold War era rather than WWII, or you have to throw out the history book and create a scenario in which “Communist China” during WWII consisted of the entire country rather than just the small area which Mao actually did control during WWII. If your objective is to borrow concepts from GW36 and import them in simplified form to Global 1940, I can’t offer any useful advice because I’m not familiar with GW36 (or any of its othr incarnations); the board members here who do know that game would be your best sources.

@CWO-Marc What do the Communist Chinese start with in your game and do they ever acquire anything more?

@carsonbparker said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:

@CWO-Marc What do the Communist Chinese start with in your game and do they ever acquire anything more?

I’ve never worked out any rules for the ChiCom territory on my custom table. My objective in customizing the table was to create (with one exceptions) a “pre-war” picture of the world, whose default values (represented by the custom roundels which are attached to the map under its covering sheet of acrylic) show what the status of each terrritory on the map actually was at the beginning of 1931, before the invasion of Manchuria and the other territorial annexations and conquests engineered by Japan, Italy, Germany in the 1930s. The exception (or at least the only one I remember) is the ChiCom roundel in Shensi, which reflects a date of 1935 rather than 1931. I couldn’t resist putting it there because my sculpt collection (which is the part of A&A that interests me the most) actually include some “Red Chinese” sculpts from the second version of the old A&A Pacific game. (They’re Russian infantry units in terms of design, but they’re made of red plastic and their bases are stamped CH rather than RU. In the first version of Pacific, they were regular-coloured RU-stamped Russian infantry sculpts, just like the ones in the old A&A Europe game.)

@Xlome_00 I have tried to do exactly this, with my G37 setup. It is however a “fantasy” setup with a german factory and ships in south america, a “bid-in” spanish civil war system where every nation on earth can dedicate setup units into Spain and then that war is fought before (and if anything survives) during the “main” game,a France that germany can defeat early on if it sends nothing to SCivilwar, but is too weak to kill France on turn 1 if they committ fully to SCW, Winter War rules to encourage non-activation of Finland by Germany, and so forth.

After I’d worked on it for a while, it was overwhelming–not integrating the new ideas but making a balanced setup similar to G1940 2nd ed where there are lots of push-pull choices in the opener that lead to different playouts.

Its just incredibly difficult to make the opener fun, flexible, with lots of good and risky choices…and still have the game continue with some semblance of order after that.

The problem with doing Communist China in G40 is that they have a unique and complex situation within the KMT. As I said before, The PLA was organized as the 4th Army under the KMT however Mao’s deal with the KMT was that he will ally with the Chinese under the condition that he operates independent from Chinese Command. So the question is how to you get this to function on a board game. The closest idea I can come up with is that Communist China turn must be done on the same turn as KMT China while being played by another player. But it is seen as a KMT unit. So are there units bought by KMT yet under command of another player?

@Caesar-Seriona How about letting the russian player control ComChina and they go right after the KMT move is over? The income part is indeed tricky. Maybe ComChina makes more than 1 ipc if they can take and hold territories from Japan?

@carsonbparker 1936 does it almost just like that with the exception that Com China is done by USSR after USSR’s turn. They are able to take territories and buy units. When allied with KMT, they are allowed to only take KMT territory and keep it for themselves if Com China liberates it from the Axis and can choose to give it back.

@Caesar-Seriona said in [Global 1940] Third Faction Idea for Russia/Communist China:

@carsonbparker 1936 does it almost just like that with the exception that Com China is done by USSR after USSR’s turn. They are able to take territories and buy units. When allied with KMT, they are allowed to only take KMT territory and keep it for themselves if Com China liberates it from the Axis and can choose to give it back.

Ya that was the same rule in HBG 39 game
As long as there Capital was a live they could build 1 Inf a turn. Started with like 4 inf and an Art I think. Moved same time as Russia. . They could not attack China or go into there territories. Plus if they liberated a Chinese territory they received no income for it.
Just go to site. Down load 39 rules. It’s in there

The problem with 1936 is that Com China is so weak at the start of 1936 that KMT can easily destroy them within two turns and USSR can’t do anything about it since they can’t Lend-Lease due to Com China not boarding USSR.