Global 1940 & 1943 Expansions Game Reports

@baron-Münchhausen

Thanks for telling me. I’ll try it sometime.

@Ichabod:

What�s wrong with the Vichy rulesin BM3 which are regularly played?

Nothing. This is just another option.

I’ve always felt the same way as the jetset. For me the dice rules are an important part of the narrative aspect of the game. They allow for more surprises or turn arounds or crushing upsets at the last minute, the kind of thing that allows you to build out a uniqur story around what just happened in a given combat.

I understand the appeal of Low Luck, but the gameplay is substantially different.  A build or combat strategy that is guaranteed to come off in LL, could fail miserably in a dice game. Sure you might be able to model averages for expected results using an LL scheme to map your strategy in a dice game, but there’s always a chance that the dice end up disagreeing with you ‘that time.’

In that respect I don’t see a huge amount of cross over. Playing 100 dice games won’t really prepare you or teach you a whole lot about what to expect in an LL game. As mentioned before low luck alters a lot of things, with respect to deadzoning and strafing, the number of defensive units required to back down an attack entitely, the way the airblitz works, the way anti aircraft fire works, etc. Just too many differences to really say that a strategy that anticipates the one style of combat is going to graph onto the other consistently.

I think after playing a few games, most players are able to determine which style of gameplay they prefer. If you love the consistency of LL, and hate the unpredictably of dice, then wait for a match with another LL player. If you hate LL, but love dice, then wait for a match against a dice player. Especially in a long game like global, if you start a playing with a combat system you dislike, then chances are that the game won’t be very satisfying for you. There are enough players out there who enjoy both ways of playing that you can probably find a likeminded opponent if you just stick it out for a little while.

To the initial question about why LL isn’t used more often, the answer is probably just because the manual doesn’t offer a description of how Low Luck works, or provide the kind official endorsement for that combat system that would probably be necessary for a larger groundswell of support. In regular tournament play it foes have a bit more cache, since that is where the systemperature was first put into practice… Fortunately for those who do enjoy Low Luck, tripleA  created simple “click tab” option in the game options menu, that allows any game to be played with universal LL rules, which I think has done a lot to popularize that style of play. There are also tripleA scenerios out there which were designed from the ground up with the LL playstyle in mind, which helps. I don’t know if the G40 designers took LL into account when they created the set up. If it was designed for LL, I imagine some of starting unit distributions might have been a little different. But again the game is pretty flexible, so even a game that wasn’t created with LL in mind, can still be adapted pretty easily, although the playtime required or the usual bids might be slightly different.

Here is the chart for special units we use. Note that most have a limit that can be on the board at one time. Most come from AA 1941, with the German Mech. Artillery being from Historical Board Gaming.

| Name
M. Art.
Tiger
JS-2
P-40
FW-190
He-111
Hood
Esc. Car.
Kongo
| Nation
Germany
Germany
USSR
USA
Germany
Germany
UK
UK US J
Japan
| Cost
5
7
7
12
11
8
12
8
12
| Att
2
4
4
4
3
3
4
0
4
| Def
2
4
4
5
4
1
4
1
4
| Move
2
2
2
6
5
7
2
3
3
| Limit
N/A
4
4
4
4
2
2
2
2
| Special
Art., Can blitz with tank, boosts inf or mech to 2.
Tank, Rerolls 6’s when in battle.
Tank, roll of 1 hits enemy tank if possible.
Fighter, Attack 2 and Defense 3 in SBR’s
Fighter, Decreases 1 enemy Fighter’s Aor D  by 1 in battle or raid.
Bomber, does not add 2 to SBR rolls.
Cruiser, Bombard at 4, fires up to 2 AA shots.
Carrier, carries 1 fighter or tactical bomber.
Cruiser, Bombards at 4.
|

Here is the latest revision (yet to be tested) of my house rule set for E&W.
If anyone is familiar with the game and would like to test it, any feedback would be appreciated.
New to east & west? Check the Imp Games website, or ask me here on in a PM! :-)

=====

Round Zero

Breakthroughs:
Diplomacy -> shift China 1 step toward the USSR, or shift the other Neutral Alliances any combination of 2 steps towards the USSR
Technology -> USSR gains 2 full-steps at Submarines, or a total of 2 half-steps at any other technology trees
Counter-Intelligence -> the USSR may make 1 free attempt, which carries over to Round 1 if successful

Purchase Units: (choose one of the following options)
a) Spend up to 48 IPCs on naval units only. Any remaining IPCs cannot be saved for use in later rounds.
b) Save 24 IPCs

Combat Movement: (choose one of the following options)
a) Conduct combat movement using infantry, armor, and heavy armor only
b) Conduct combat movement using aircraft and naval units only

Resolve Combat:
The attack value of all aircraft and naval units is increased by 2, for Round Zero combat only.

Non-Combat Movement:
You may not move infantry, armor, or heavy armor in this phase.

Place Units:
Your Industrial Complexes can each produce 2 additional units, on Round Zero only.

Collect Income:
The USSR collects 48 IPCs at the end of Round Zero.

Breakthroughs

This phase replaces the Spying and Technology phases of the turn.
Each country can make a number of free Breakthrough rolls per turn, as follows:
• USSR: 3
• WE: 1
• UK: 1
• USA: 2

Each country may also purchase a number of additional Breakthrough rolls up to double their number of free attempts, each round on the Breakthrough phase of their turn. Free Breakthroughs may be rolled before deciding to purchase additional Breakthroughs; you may also purchase and then roll extra Breakthroughs one at a time, up to your country’s maximum. Each additional breakthrough roll costs the same number of IPCs as an infantry; 2 for the USSR or 3 for NATO countries.

On a Breakthrough roll of 1, you may choose to gain either a Diplomatic Breakthrough with a Neutral Alliance, or a full-step in any technology tree. On a Breakthrough roll of 2, you may choose to gain either a Diplomatic Breakthrough with a Minor Neutral, or a half-step in any technology tree. You cannot gain more than one full-step in each technology tree on a single Breakthrough phase; Neutral Alliances can be influenced a maximum 1 step on each Breakthrough phase.

Faction-specific Breakthrough Rules:
The USSR may make 1 free Counter-Intelligence roll during their Breakthrough phase; a roll of 1 or 2 foils a NATO Breakthrough roll of 1 or 2 (respectively) on that round only. The USSR may choose which Breakthrough roll to affect with their Counter-Intelligence roll, however successful rolls do not carry over to later rounds if saved and not used. The USSR may purchase up to 2 additional Counter-Intelligence rolls on their Breakthrough phase, for 2 IPCs each.

When a NATO country uses a Breakthrough roll of 1 to gain a technology, they may choose to grant any other NATO countries (who are at the same point or lower down on that technology tree) a free half-step in that tree.

Optional Rules:
• NATO countries cannot gain the benefit of shared advancement in the Nuclear Weapons technology tree.
• The USSR may influence China using a Breakthrough roll of 2.

@techroll42:

That’s really, really not funny

THATS FUNNY!!! (your post is funny)

Anzac, in reality, could only defend itself versus an eventually over-extended Japan pushing south. 6 IPCs will build just enough Inf to survive. I dont recall Anzac invading anywhere except into New Guinea whereas Canada at 11 IPCs could build Inf & Transports to do what it actually did, re-inforce United Kingdom bedises have its own beach & army on D Day. Boring maybe but definitely more realistic to what happened & a mark of a good simulation is to be as realistic as possible. The designers put a Canadian emblem on the board - too bad they didn`t distinguish the Canadian forces that should be on the board (like the Anzac) & possibly provide some control markers, as well.

Deleted my prior post…I put it in the wrong forum!  :oops: