Crazy idea for Axis And Allies 1940 second edition

@hengst This house rules forum is full of ideas. To avoid scripted games you need a varaiety ways to win or lose a game in a reasonable amount of time ,eg 8 to 12 rounds.BBR and 3G40 are rulesets that encourage you to win by achieving various victory objectives.(not just victory cities)
3G40 changes turn order,merges Anzac into UKPacific,and sticks pretty close to oob rules.BBR is more complex than oob and is real popular.Both are designed to play in 1 day and to be able to declare a winner.

@Valladares

I used Tank as substitute for Artillery bonus on Infantry.

No need for more sculpts, just giving +1 Attack bonus when paired 1:1 with a Tank.

That way, you introduce a combined arms mechanics at no real cost. In addition, you make Inf+ Tank combo the best attacking land units compared to 3 Infantry by a small margin, for same cost.

Quick update, due to some last minute play testing and rule tuning, the completed scenario will be delayed until tomorrow (but it is coming out ;) )

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.

The scale is the thing that most bedevils me.

I was recently watching some commentary on house rules from [b]Lion in the Trenches[/b], who was reacting to suggestions that he place an Austrian cruiser in the Sea Zone off Tsingtao in his Global 1914 customization. He made the point that a single Austrian cruiser doesn’t scale with the squadron or fleet implied by the corresponding game piece.

By my estimate, Global 1940 models ground units at the level of army corps, naval units at the level of fleets or task forces, and air forces at the level of wings. There are a handful of exceptions for colonial detachments, such as the two starting British Infantry in Kwangtung (Hong Kong), which stand in for about 14,500 defenders historically. India’s potential as a source of colonial manpower is significantly curtailed by the British Empire’s income problems, and Australia often explodes in production by the end game (win or lose) even when their national manpower pool and industrial capacity would never have allowed it.

In my opinion, scale should be balanced rigorously against the opportunity for fun gameplay. In my Global War games, I always add a French Infantry in Indochina, for example. There is also a clear movement in favor of bulking up the Dutch presence in the East Indies when games of Global War are played, and many players prefer to give the Italian fleet-in-being a fighting chance with set-up variants to blunt the Taranto Raid.

@ABWorsham4 I’ve almost abandon G40 for HBG 1936 and they made Canada it’s own power in an expansion so I am fine.

The Factories (As well as some of the Mnor Axis Units) came from “The War Game” (which is a great game).

After several more games, that have all ended with my winning, My friends and I have decided to add a number of objectives, and an alliance system to it, to give them game a bit more of a purpose. We have several New national objectives for each of the countries, and we have written up 24 global objectives for players to accomplish to win the game. The thought is to give each player 2 or 3 global objectives and this is what they have to do to win the game. We are going to be spending all friday night and saturday day play testing these out. God Help me!  :wink: