Axis & Allies Global 1940 House Rules Expansion

@jonathan-rost Yes, although I may just have found a bunch in Mechanicsville.

it’s one of those things where you have “12 IPC’s left” and someone is wanting to build ships but dont just want 2 subs

Hi @nishav

I use Factory Limited from the Redesign Thread. I find them to work well.

“FactoryLimited” Air and Naval Bases now cost 12. All captured and newly constructed Minor Factories may only produce Artillery, AAguns, Armor, Mech Infantry, Mobile Infantry, Marines, Elite and Infantry. If a NB is present you may also build Subs, Transports, Escort Carriers and Destroyers. If an AB is present you may also build Fighters and Tac Bombers.

ABs are required to build Fighters, Tac Bombers, Bombers and Air Transports. Bombers and Air Transports may only be built in Factories on originally owned Territories that also have an AB. In addition, Bombers and Air Transports may not be built in the following territories: Kwangtung, Egypt, Norway, Alaska, West India and Korea. May not build at an AB with 3 or more damage.

NBs are required to build all Naval Units. BBs, CVs and CAs may only be built in Territories with originally owned starting Factories. These Territories must also have a NB (Need not be original NB). May not build at a NB with 3 or more damage.

So similar to what you’ve suggested. Basically the Big Guns can only be built in original major factories.

These rules are part of the Axis & Allies Global 1940 2E, House Rules Expansion.

Some basic units from the OOB G40 rulebook have seen a cost reduction. This is due to the multiple new units & rules that are included in Axis & Allies Global 1940 2E, House Rules Expansion rulebook.

6. G40 Cost of all units, page 1.pdf
6. G40 Cost of all units, page 2.pdf

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in When USA not at War:

@Marshmallow-of-War ANZAC DOW is not always dumb. Sometimes it allows a key ship block or prevents transports in disputed zones from picking up soldiers. I have seen it happen a handful of times.

Completely true! The ANZAC declaration following a UK Pacific ship move is a classic! I can’t imagine anyone taking issue with that.

However, you’re ignoring the second half of that…

It’s taking the Carolines after initiating a war that leaves the US out of the fight that is the issue, leaving the transports vulnerable and stripping defenses from ANZAC itself. I can’t imagine a scenario where that would be wise.

Uh…hello. There is a global zombie war game called Zombie State. I’ve seen it and read some reviews. I’ve actually designed a pretty complicated Axis and Allies Zombies game using the Global 1940 maps. I use Fortress America infantry units for zombies as I don’t have any real specific Z sculpts. I’m afraid I made the rules so complicated that people might compare it to Cones of Dunshire. The Zs are pretty slow and certainly not unkillable. I combined the idea of supernatural undead springing up everywhere thanks to Hitler (he gets munched right off the bat and Admiral Donitz takes over what’s left of Germany) with some pandemic plagues. So some Zs can infect you while others just tear you limb from limb. If the players want to just beat on the Zombies they can unite and do that, or if they want to fight each other the Zs get exponentially tougher and rip into all of them. Like “nightmare” level in some computer games. I’ve been working on it for a few years on and off. Max Brooks World War Z novel and the Harry Turtledove Balance novels were a good inspiration for this kind of thing. Let me know if you’re still interested in this game concept. There is actually someone who started this a few years back with the old A and A Classic map and some fun ideas for introducing Zs into WW2, but I’ve always preferred bigger maps and lots of different unit types.

@empireman:

this is cool! :-D
Just 1 thing: Sweden should not be pro anything

Yeah, there’s a problem with Sweden being pro-Finland….  mainly that the Finns and Swedes had a rather contentious relationship due in part to the fact that Sweden and Russia both vied for control of Finland.  Many of the treaties between Sweden and Russia that resulted from these wars used Finland a a bargaining chip, ceding land to each with little regard for an independent Finnish state.  So yeah…  Finns don’t really like Swedes.

Tangentially, a Swedish historian told a group of us that in a treaty with the Russians from one of the final wars between them there was a clause that if Sweden were to engage in hostilities again against the Russians and they were to lose, Russia would claim all Swedish lands.  He indicated that this was one of the many reasons Sweden maintained neutrality, even when supplying materials to the Axis.

updated 11/10/07 check first page