G40 Strict Neutrals Expansion

The Tank Hunter & Panzer Jäger units rulebook is expected to be released no later than 16th December 2024.

@general-spengler said in [Global 1940] Units Expansion Set:

Also if anyone has thoughts on the values (particularly cost) and if they seem balanced that would be good info as well.

Good action here. Global 40 House Rules has Escort CVs at C 9. I figured at 10, you’d just buy a 2 hit Fleet CV at 16 instead, although Italy or ANZAC might still buy one. There’s also an option that gives them ASW ability as well to encourage buys.

board 3659 has them moving only 1 +1 w/NB. In my tests Italy buys them and sometimes ANZAC, but not really anybody else. I just test against myself though. I still like them and think they’re a cool unit.

The Conscripts are A0 D1 C2 max build of 8. Can conquer empty TTYs though. They get spammed otherwise. I think with your limit of 2 per turn and using the Recruitment Centers are good ideas to limit that though as well as not being able to attack.

I always stick em in the front line and use them as bullet stoppers lol. Russia really likes em.

These could be added to the House Rules Mod for triplea if you want. Idk if you use triplea or not, but it’s real good for testing stuff from a time standpoint even if you prefer the physical board.

Once again, Good Action : )

@barnee

Back in Early 2023, Dark Knight and I had a game, where I was playing the Allies - and gradually preparing the USA for an invasion of the Home Island of Japan.

This picture shows the situation in Late 1944 and clearly demonstrates why it is extremely difficult to invade Japan when you play against a Highly Skilled Opponent:

IMG_6724.JPG

An Allied Economic Victory was achieved before the invasion of Japan took place.

@all-encompassing-goose

The Captain mentioned it in a private chat with me, so I’m sure he knows it, although I’m not sure on his opinions though. I might copy it to his glossary of his house rule topics.

Based on your feedback, I’ve made a couple of tweaks to the variant. The most recent version is attached for play testing.

Changes from the original version are indicated by underscoring:

Revised Russian National Objectives

1. Spread of Communism: Bonus for Russian control of originally Axis/Pro-Axis territories is confined to mainland Europe (excluding Africa, Iraq, mid-east Islands, etc.).

2. Lend Lease: Russia receives +5 PUs, when at war with Germany/Italy, if at least one of three historical Lend-Lease lanes is “open” (i.e., the lane territory is friendly-controlled and there are no enemy warships in the corresponding sz). The Lend-Lease lanes are as follows:

a. Archangel, sz 125
b. Persia, sz 80
c. Siberia, sz 5

As in the original version of the NO, the presence of non-Russian allied units in originally Russian territory cancels out the objective.

(Hat tip to calvinhobbesliker and ItIsILeClercs for this change. I enjoyed reading up on the subject)

Other Allied National Objectives

1. Western Europe Beach Head: Allied control of at least two of the following gives USA +5 PUs if at war: Normandy, Holland, Western Germany, Denmark.

(Hat tip to The Hessian for this change)

2. Southern Europe Beach Head: Allied control of at least two of the following gives UK + 5 PUs: Southern France, Sicily, Sardinia, Greece.

3. Vital Forward Bases: Allied control of all of the following gives USA +5 PUs if at war: Wake Island, Midway, Caroline Islands, Marianas, Marshall Islands.

(Hat tip to Gencre for this change)

Air Raids

Fighters attack and defend at 2 during air raids. Strategic and tac bombers attack at 1.

Play-Testing

Over the last week, I had the chance to play test the variant a half-dozen times times, both as Allies and Axis. Some observations:

1. Axis players generally were more proactive in defending Western Europe against small-sale allied incursions.

2. In two games, Italy used its surving transport (after Taranto) to move defensive units to sicily and sardinia.

3. In all but one of the games, the changes to the Lend Lease objective effectively extended Russia’s +5 PU bonus until entry of allied units into Russia (usually by round 6 or 7). Mostly, no serious effort was made to contest the objective. However, in one game I was able to defeat it by getting a sub to sz 80 by round 4.

4. The 2 attack/defense value of fighters during air raids significantly reduced the frequency of unescorted bombing raids. Dark skies was not attempted in any of the games I played (whether due to the changes, or a coincidence, I don’t know).

5. The “Vital Forward Bases” objective encouraged “island-hopping,” as well as early naval engagement in the central-pacific, which was fun.

Thanks again for ur feedback guys. Am curious to hear your thoughts on the changes. Shoot me a message if you’d like to arrange a play test.

RegularkidG40BalanceVariantv5.tsvg

Bumped due to changes made to original post.

Also, perhaps when the combined allies/axis is greater than X over the combined allies/axis, they generate one VP?

This would solve the turtle issue forcing whichever side to come out and fight or face defeat.

Example: is axis have 25+ more IPC combined than allies, +1 VP per turn as long as they have this advantage.

Secondly, the axis and allies start with a different number of VC, so you might have to assign different values for every city, rather than blanket the map with fixed values for each city.

The ability to gain objectives matters alot toward balancing…which is one of the main reasons why i don’t like NO’s because they are not equal in terms of capturing/protecting…partly why the OOB setup was imbalanced IMO.

I do use a tech to represent ASW, but that can be easily made from a rider on “shipyards” technology as you have.

Also, a convoy zone can be as simple as placing a token on the sea zone from a list for each player. Thats not ‘advanced’ at all. Sea zones are not advanced idea and used in AAE and AAP. MY only change is the IPC they represent is now represented by the new occupier should the attached income now be under new control.