Pheonix AZ Global War 1936 v3

The rules (3.3) say that you lose VPs per land zone in home territory that has a point value.

KMT/CCPs home territory consists of KMT, CCP, Warlords, Manchuria, Hong Kong, and Formosa.

So basically the Japanese really have to screw the pooch for KMT/CCP to get all their VPs.

Unless I’m missing something?

@hbg-gw-enthusiast said in Does the Global War 1936-1945 board game (third edition) actually exist? How can I buy one?:

@gen-manstein said in Does the Global War 1936-1945 board game (third edition) actually exist? How can I buy one?:

What were the Plan Z ships ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Z

Ya I read that. Thanks hbg-gw. Thought I missed something. Thought maybe co. Made a specific piece. Yes I do have as a National
Adjective in my game

A2C566A8-C3FE-49DE-8C4C-DC686358B561.jpeg

@hbg-gw-enthusiast I would just add italicised texta clause saying something on the lines of “aircraft may not be placed on carriers during the place units phase” in that section, and a clause saying “newly built carriers may not be used to guarantee landing spots for fighters and tactical bombers.”
It is rather obvious is you look for it, but I think a FAQ or a additional clause is needed.

@generalhandgrenade Thanks! The German player used their whole navy to take out the 2 Norwegian boats thinking the Kriegsmarine was safe and the brits were about to crush it, before we gave him a taksie-backsie.

@MAX1313 I think you misspoke a bit above. You mention V3 every time, when I think you meant V2 somewhere in there.

I’m not 100% positive on this, but I believe the East vs. West Expansion was created with V3 in mind. Meaning, some of the territory names on the map have changed from V2. So if you only have the V2 map, I think you’ll see things from the East vs. West Expansion that do not make sense.

One of the reasons I’m debating getting V3 still. Would love to have the compatibility with the Expansions, as I have a feeling V2 will fall completely to the wayside eventually, which would make sense.

Hey all!

So, this might be a question for those who have played some games with the V3 rules a few times, and/or those who helped play test or help refine (like GHG).

I’m just wondering what changes between the two versions of the game people are bummed about that were taken out of V2, or just altered a lot. I don’t have any experience with V3 yet, other than reading the beta rules on their website once or twice. Would love to get others’ takes on what they might miss or not agree with. Just thinking ahead to the potential of house ruling a bit to revert to V2 if anyone wanted.

A couple potential talking points (and sorry, it’s been a minute since I read through the V3 beta rules, so I might be misremembering):

Variations in unit costs by nation? I think I read that all units of the same type will now cost the same for every nation, right? Does everyone like this rule? My gut reaction is I kind of liked having a little variable there, as it gave different nations different advantages. But on the flip side, I understand from a level playing field perspective how making all the same makes sense. Not to mention it probably simplifies the rules a bit. Any opinions?

Special units. I might be misremembering here, but I thought there were no longer special units, like Volkstrum, Black Shirts, etc. for some nations. How do people feel about that? Do they miss that variation a bit, or is it pointless?

Naval options. I’ve mentioned this before, and have heard how others feel. But again, just curious on thoughts. Do people like all the different naval base and naval unit options now in V3? Or has anyone found it might bog the game down a bit at times? Just curious.

Any missed opportunities for improvement that you think would have been beneficial?

Thanks!

Chris

@Wildcat6305 Thank you for confirming! I was 99% sure. This is my brothers first time playing, so he’s had his own opinions on what some of the rules mean, so I’ve had to explain a lot.

Yeah, that’s why I wanted to specify that Yugoslavia and Greece had also been attacked. He starts the game at war with Abyssinia, and Albania isn’t technically an attack, so I knew those didn’t count.

@Wildcat6305
Thanks for the reply! Yeah, I watched the video after I posted (dumb of me), and noticed the new cities, new islands in the pacific, etc.

I wasn’t too worried about the terrain features, if that was the only change. I could find some other way to represent jungle, dessert, tundra, etc. with my current map. But sounds like that won’t work.

Not going to lie, that’s highly disappointing. Really disappointing that they’d do that to your customers who already shelled out $150.00+ for the current map, just to make a new one making this obsolete. You essentially HAVE to buy the new one in order to get the rule fixes (which are desperately needed), otherwise they would not make sense with the old map, or would have to be further modified/house ruled by individual owners. Just upsetting, because we don’t all have $150.00 to throw around every 2 years when they decide to update the map.

Oh well, looks like I’ll have to think on it.