Was wondering if the no home country stipulation for FEC applies to the militia movement as well. I know for KMT and CCP it specifically states militia can move 1 within China only after they evolve to a major power. But it doesn’t mention anything of the sort on the FEC reference sheet, only the same 1 movement within home country. so can militia move 1 within Far East borders or are they stuck in the tt they begin in since they don’t have home country?
@insaneHoshi Hi, I meant that if the Seaplane have a patrol range of 2 instead of 1 from the start - that would mean that the allies can cover all convoy spaces with aircraft from start. That would be wrong, historically. So the range should be 1 to simulate the Atlantic gap problem the allies had.
In the Netherlands Fight Back expansion, the (v 3.) rules mention that :
(NFB 4.5) “The Dutch may build Colonial Infantry in territories with a point value just like the British. A maximum of one unit per turn may be built. It must be placed in a territory with a point value.”
First question : The cost for Colonial Infantry is not listed in the (v.3.0) Netherlands Reference Sheet. Do they cost 4 IPP “just like the British”?
It also mentions that :
(NFB 3.2) “You may build 1 commando per turn at a factory location. The Dutch may build 1 commando on Sumatra as if it were a militia.”
This seems to limit the Dutch West Indies builds to either Militia, 1 Colonial Infantry per turn and a sigle commando unit on Sumatra “without a factory location”.
However, the game rules only allow building a minor factory “in any land zone with a IPP-value and in Supply Path to Major Factory in Home Country” (as per Table 12-2 of the 1936 v3 Rules).
Since the Dutch Home Country is limited to the Netherlands (as per the Reference Sheet), this would be the only possible location to build a Major factory (as per Table 12-2 of the 1936 v3 Rules).
If Germany and Japan both leave the Dutch alone, this will never happen. With a peacetime IPP of 1, it would take 9 full years just to build the Major Factory (at a cost of 6/6/6) and 4 more to build one minor factory in the Dutch East Indies (at a cost of 8).
Even with most part of the 12 IPP Wartime Economy available, any sensible player probably will have more urgent priorities than to build a shiny new Major Factory right on the German Border…
Taking all of this into consideration, aside from having distinct orange battle pieces for the Dutch, this expansion only seems to divert much needed IPP from the British Economy, since it now keeps the Wartime Economy as a separate income (NFB 4.2).
In light of the above, the full build table on the reference sheet seems very theorical and an impossible achievement.
For those who play with the NFB expansion, how does it affect your game?
I also notice that the (v 3.0) Reference Sheet is not adapted to the v.3 Rules, with 4-turn builds for example. It also does not list the turn order for the Dutch, but I saw this issue mentionned in an older post also.
@insaneHoshi good points all around. I wasn’t think big picture when you said that. Of course others would have to be at war to Lend Lease. So yeah, that makes it a different situation anyways. Still though, just goes to show there are a plethora of possibilities!
@GuamSolo said in How is the balance in Global War 1936 Version 3:
When Germany takes Moscow in 2 rounds you just needed more units over all.
To prevent such a scenario, you also may want to consider, building a fortification in Moscow. Most likely that in order to take Moscow in 2 rounds Germany has to use their double impulse and/or Blitz into Moscow. Building a fort prevents blitzes and might give you enough time to rally your defenses ( and provide a good defence as well).
@sleipnersm38 Yeah, I hear you. I think they’re just keeping it consistent with their rules throughout the base game, i.e. bonuses can’t stack. That’s already something they’ve done. For example, defenders/attackers of a city with a river don’t get bonuses/negatives to stack on each other. Same with river and mountain territories, etc.
Just to clarify my example and yours too, a commander could help units on a mountain territory that were defending, but it would be non-mountain infantry units, since mountain infantry already have a +1 bonus. Regular infantry, militia, etc. could still benefit from that commander.
@Noneshallpass I think the roundels were originally just a fun extra flavor for using under your Panzer Grenadiers in the standard game (i.e. before they created this expansion). So it was, and is, fun to have the insignia’s included on even just for flair! But when using the Expansion I suppose they become worthless as a Global War piece since the standard game Panzer Grenadier rules are replaced. But yeah, I do think that’s the explanation on why you received them with the Expansion.
Good point on the wording. I could certainly be wrong given that wording that I clearly overlooked. My gut says that might be an error, in wording, but that’s obviously not official haha. I’d say if there’s one big flaw in the rules over time, it’s been consistency in wording and also clarification at times, so I do think that could be it.
I guess you could, as a sort of “house rule”, decide that the January 1943 placement rules can be changed to putting the roundels under mechanized infantry, and then the July 1943 would be upgrading those mechanized infantry to medium armor? May be too much of a stretch though.
Yes, it’s any 2 Soviet cities. Cities are only territories in the shape of a circle (or semi-circle on coastlines). We tried to remove all of the other city names from the V-2 map and replace them with regional names.
Murmansk does not have a circular territory and therefore is not considered a city territory. It exists in the territory of Kola. The only reference I’ve seen for those types of cities like Vladivostock and Murmansk is Red Cities in the Elite of the Soviet Union expansion set. I think they were probably put there for aesthetics.
@Noneshallpass Yeah, it says that, but I don’t think that description has ever been updated haha. Kind of what I was saying above, I think what you’re seeing there was the initial hoped for gaming experience, but I think as development as gone on, it’s not going to be quite as intertwined as implied. I think more what GHG said is probably accurate (plus I know he talks with Doug at HBG quite a bit). But I don’t think you’re going to see sweeping changes for each game based on the one you just completed before it!
To kind of answer your broader question as to how quickly they restock generally, I’d say it’s every few months. There’s no specific schedule for resupplying or anything like that (that I know of at least). I think it depends on how popular the unit is, and when they have a large enough order to their suppliers to get done.
I just wanted to follow up just so you knew it wasn’t something where you’d see your preferred units back in stock within a few days or weeks. It’s typically a while longer than that, from my experience!
@CaptainNapalm Tank Designer: “We don’t need armor on top of the tank. Who is going to hit the top of the tank?”
Two years later, an anti-tank gunner is lining up to nail the engine and halt the tank - from 20 meters up…
I think the “each time” thing threw you off a bit there too. That is more in reference to any attacks on other neutrals besides China (Warlords/KMT/CCP all included in that “China” umbrella), and not to potential other attacks on other Chinese factions.
But as GHG said, once a faction of any kind in China is attacked, the rest automatically align, so there couldn’t possibly be any other Chinese factions that could be considered neutral anymore anyways!
@GeneralHandGrenade Excellent! Thank you, GHG.
“In other words you could place 5 infantry AND 5 ships at a territory with a major shipyard and a major factory. The shipyard is a factory for ships but needs to be connected to the factory for supply purposes.”
Completely changed my understanding of shipyards!
Interesting takes from you both. This could lose focus, but I do like historical discussion
I think you both have valid points on the historical aspects vs. game play realities.
Britain’s and France’s alliance, at least in the form we know it as it concerns WWII, stemmed in 1938-1939 after the Munich Conference. The alliance was really geared towards stemming German/Italian expansions in Europe. I don’t think Japan/Asia was really much of a thought or concern. That probably stems from a number of things, a couple being a contemporary belief in Japanese/Asian inferiority (even with Japanese military success in the recent past), as well as being largely unaware that Japan would eventually harbor the ill will to fight the Allies. They didn’t join the Axis until 1940, remember.
That’s all to say that I agree with GHG, in a historical context, that Britain and France were more concerned about issues closer to home.
All that said, from a gaming perspective, I do agree with Dran here. In a hypothetical reality where Japan preemptively assaulted the British Empire in Hong Kong, Malay, Burma, India, etc., I think it’s very obvious France would have gone on high alert, fully realizing their Indochinese colonies might all of a sudden be in jeopardy. We of course cannot know this, since Indochina was occupied after a Vichy government took control. But I think reason dictates there would have been a heightening of fears in the French Empire.
In that regard, it would have been nicer to have seen a bit more of a peacetime income increase for a situation like this, I agree. But at least there is that +1 IPP for Japan attacking a Neutral UK.
Sounds good. We just didn’t know if the optional rule about capturing a territory with a capital ship being produced at a shipyard sort of trumped that specific rule. We have been using the rule you posted instead of the optional rule with france. Thanks!
@GeneralHandGrenade Unsurprising that you have the intel GHG! And ultimately unsurprising this is in the works. They’ve done such a great job with diverse expansions, this was bound to be an area for one. Very intrigued it’s the same designer as Latin America, as I think that Expansion (and China at War) was one of the best thought out ones they’ve done yet! Will be very interested in seeing this in the future, I think it could hold a lot!
I completely agree, I think the Med/North Africa could be a great standalone game. I posted on the forums here years ago how cool it would be to see an A&A game like that done, though really any similar game like that would be great. There’s so much that can be done.
The biggest criticisms I’ve really heard on the topic was that you couldn’t really do a true “final victory”, since any map would obviously not actually include a Berlin as a final destination to take, and that this game wouldn’t feel like you “won the war”. Well, I guess that’s true, but who cares! One needs to look at is as a Theater-level game. You’re objective is victory in the Theater. That might mean taking Rome and Tunis for the Allies, or taking Cairo as the Axis, or it could just mean surviving a certain amount of time.
The other part of this would be how to incorporate the US. Do you start a game on the eve of Operation Torch? Or have a game similar to Global 1940, where the US joins starting a certain turn? I personally would advocate for the later. I’d love to play out a game where I do what I can with British and Commonwealth forces early on, and then see the tide turn with a US entry. I’ve seen complaints of how people think it would be dumb to just have US forces bought/appear from the edge of a map (since the US would presumably not be represented here). Again, I say you’ve got to be able to have fun with a game!
@ArtilleryAficianado Correct on question #1, no limit on how many infantry can be upgraded to motorized infantry.
Question #2, I’d have to agree with your hunch and insaneHoshi. I don’t think that would count, as it’s a unique area of movement. But a very good question that I certainly am not definitive on the answer to!
@turndown4rip Interesting. I believe in your scenario combat would have to happen.
You say above that the UK would wait to declare war until that moment. I find it hard to believe that they wouldn’t already be at war though. The moment Germany attacked France, the UK would have gone to full wartime income. While true, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the UK has to actually declare war on the Axis at that moment in time. And per the rules, as you’ve surmised, they can declare war at any moment during any portion of anyone’s turn.
All that said, I’d have to imagine a German player will have already hit the UK fleet in the Atlantic somewhere, making war already a thing. But I may be getting off topic a bit, as your scenario is technically plausible!
I guess with your situation above, the UK has declared war after Germany’s combat movement phase. So no combat would happen on Germany’s turn. But when the UK’s turn came around, the UK could choose to move it’s ships out of the shared seazone and away from combat. If they left the ships in that zone though, combat would occur. You couldn’t just decide to leave your ships in a contested territory while at war and not have combat occur.
To your Dutch query, I’d have to agree with @ArtilleryAficianado. While you’re correct that those are valuable resources the Commonwealth as a whole losses out on, the Japanese would also be hurt as well by never having all that income, or the bonus income that comes with it. I think that would balance itself out that way. Plus, I think a smart Axis player would effectively negate the Allies from gaining much of that income. A smart move would be to wait to attack the Netherlands itself as Germany until Japan is simultaneously ready to take the DEI, to stop the very issue you bring up of the Commonwealth gaining that income!
I wouldn’t call myself any kind of official on the rules, first off.
Yeah, this is a bit different than the other nations. I would say first off that this is one of the bigger differences between versions 2 and 3. I believe the game makers went out intentionally with the idea of making conflict between the Comintern and Allies a more realistic possibility. Example, in Version 2, the Allies and Comintern couldn’t declare war on each other until the Axis had been defeated (though I think there’s a little loophole in the Monroe Doctrine there). Same with China, the KMT or CCP would not have been allowed to declare war on the Comintern or Allies, respectively, until all foreign powers were expelled from mainland China.
The Version 3 rules open this up for conflict earlier on, so I think this was absolutely intentional on their end.
Of note, in order for the KMT or CCP to get Major Power status, they need to effectively have control of all of China. They need 13 IPP, I think there are only like 16 IPP possible in all of China. So while not necessarily needing FULL control of all China, that IPP threshold probably effectively means they’ve won the Chinese Civil War, and arguably have expelled Japanese power on the mainland for that to have happened also.
That’s my long way of saying that their ability to declare war is probably not as easy as it reads on the surface. Plus, I think the KMT would have a hard time deciding to declare war on the USSR unilaterally until the other Allied nations were available to assist!
@Midnight_Reaper said in 20 Years of Axis & Allies .org:
@CWO-Marc As for what we did and did not have back in 2000, I made a small chart
Great chart, Midnight Reaper; it brings back lots of memories. A further point to note is that, in Classic, only the infantry sculpt was nation-specific and was based on authentic WWII designs; the equipment sculpts started following the same design principle with Europe / Pacific / Revised, though it took a long while to achieve (by combining E1940.2, P1940.2 and 1941) a full array for everyone except France. We were also treated to some neat special-category sculpts: the German blockhouses in D-Day, the American and German trucks in Bulge, and the entirely-other-war sculpt set of 1914. Another nice development in the official games has been the addition of China, Italy, ANZAC and France to the original five powers (US, UK, USSR, Germany and Japan). And in the early days, people who wanted extra types of units (or extra colours to represent other countries) had to make do with third-party products like the Xeno and Table Tactics ones or the Enemy on the Horizon expansion set, the quality of which was uneven and the availability of which wasn’t always great. Things certainly have changed.
Since I had the U.S. naval colors out, I pushed through with the Lexington rebuild.
Here’s the previous look.
Reused everything but the rear structure, boosting the fwd. island about 1.5mm. Rear section fabricated with styrene stock.
Think I might have gone a little to big? Still 100% better. That’s what I get for trying to use the rear of a classic tank turret the first time.
Stay safe all.
Oh, one more thing. The huge Japanese battleship was called Yamato. Yamamoto was the name of Japan’s most famous admiral. Maybe the arrival of Admiral Yamamoto would indeed correspond to having an extra battleship, but I’m not sure that’s what you intended.