Young Grasshopper's G40 House Rules

[8thGuards]

I like this idea. Gonna play with them next time with my group.

[CaptainNapalm]

Good stuff, YGH! I was wondering what inspired the change to the production facilities? What territories, or areas on the map did you feel were getting too much or too little production that first planted the idea in your mind?

And, as a fly on the wall, I’m curious if/where you see these facilties coming into play in your games in the Cliffside Bunker?

The Depot in the Philippines is what stands out the most to me at first glance. I see that making a J1 DOW almost a must!  :-o

[Young Grasshopper]

@Mill:

Good stuff, YGH! I was wondering what inspired the change to the production facilities? What territories, or areas on the map did you feel were getting too much or too little production that first planted the idea in your mind?

And, as a fly on the wall, I’m curious if/where you see these facilties coming into play in your games in the Cliffside Bunker?

The Depot in the Philippines is what stands out the most to me at first glance. I see that making a J1 DOW almost a must! :-o

Hey Mill Creek, Thanks for your questions and comments.

Over the past 3-4 years there have been many forum discussions about adding production facilities to the already existing ones. Many people have offered ideas of facilities slightly greater than a Minor IC, and others suggest a facility smaller than a Minor IC… The member with the most inspiration for my work on this was KNP, and from his suggestions I decided to work on a system that had both a greater and a lesser than Minor facility bringing it to a total of 4 production units available.

I have introduced tons of house rules to my core gaming group over several years, the ones that have become unanimously accepted for all our current games at the Bunker are the victory tokens we use to determine a winner, and the new or modified national objectives to create some balance. Some of my own personal favorites like a combined UK Pacific/ANZAC nation, and AAA capabilities for cruisers and battleships have been rejected among our group… as well as the 4 production facility system. Out of all the house rules we don’t play at the Bunker, the new production facilities are my favorite, and therefore… I included them on my house rule document.

The 4 production facility system favors the Allies the most, so it can be used as a tremendous balance mechanic instead of the bid system. If you read the capabilities and restrictions of each facility, as well as the new starting setup for initial placement (like you noticed about the Philippines)… you will see some interesting possibilities for a game.

• The United States may build more units in Western USA when not at war, they may build up to 10 IPCs worth of units on the Philippines and Hawaii, and they may place up to 5 units in Norway if they build a Major factory there.

• The Russians can build more units on the front in Leningrad, more on Stalingrad after a strong German advance, and they can build a depot if they want more units in the far east.

• ANZAC can now build 5 units in Sydney instead of just 3, Calcutta can now get have 2 major factories in and around India, and the UK can build slightly cheaper facilities in and around Egypt.

• How does these facilities effect the Axis?.. not by much, the facilities they capture will be downgraded or destroyed forcing them to buy their own. Any 5 unit producing major factory in Romania and/or the Asian coast are possible threats, but they are expensive and although military depots only cost 10 IPCs to build… their production output for Axis needs are weak at best.

Please let me know what you think…

YG

[CaptainNapalm]

My thoughts will probably stay at opinions and theories, unfortunately. I don’t play “Deluxe” face to face. I play online, and usually the Balanced Mod. For face to face games, we usually stick to Anniversary Edition as it is a great game, and more manageable in one sitting.

Staying on the production facilities subject, I agree with you that they sound fun and interesting, but I agree with your group that it might be too much to implement on a regular basis. They would change the game in a huge way! Might be better, true, but a huge change is hard to get universally accepted.

The shared, and noble, ideas behind Balanced Mod and your house rules, are: minimize the need for a bid due to imbalance, and expand quality strategic options in different theatres of the war. Sealion, Africa, Mediterranean, Pacific Islands, etc.

It seems to me, putting a major factory in Novgorod, and a Military Depot in the Philippines, both strike me as limiting the variety of choices the Axis have. Germany is punished for not going Barbarossa, and Japan is punished for no J1 DOW. Neat ideas, but the resulting effects on game play may take away from your larger intended goals.

Just looking at the prices, they seem expensive. The minor has no increased value from OOB, is now more expensive, able to be hit by tac bombers, and is limited in production unit type. What are your thoughts about 8, 12, and 16(or 18) pricing?

Japan purchases more factories than any other nation, and I would love to see how far they could extend their power into Asia with some military depots in Chinese and Russian territories!  :-D

[GeneralHandGrenade]

Question regarding the victory objectives. For the Economy objective that the Axis can achieve, does that total include national objectives as well or just income from territories? I have to ask because I never use an income tracker and I don’t know if you include N.O.'s in them.

[Young Grasshopper]

@GeneralHandGrenade:

Question regarding the victory objectives. For the Economy objective that the Axis can achieve, does that total include national objectives as well or just income from territories? I have to ask because I never use an income tracker and I don’t know if you include N.O.'s in them.

Hey GHG,

It’s the total amount of income from the income tracker of all 3 Axis nations for this token… so national objectives not included.

[CaptainNapalm]

YGH, any thoughts on my post above?

[Young Grasshopper]

@Mill:

YGH, any thoughts on my post above?

Hey Mill Creek, sorry for my late reply… It’s difficult for me to argue or defend anything in the way of new facilities simply because I’ve only played with them once (a very fun game). Your analysis seems accurate in theory and anything I debunk or side with would also be theory… I do stand by my prices though, these new production hubs should not be cheap.

This was your quote…

“They would change the game in a huge way! Might be better, true, but a huge change is hard to get universally accepted”.

I agree with that statement 100%, and it can be said for about 90% of all ideas within this forum.

[baron Münchhausen]

IDK what kind of facility your prefer, but I know Barney is trying hard to put some kind on Military Base into modular options for G40 Redesign on Triple A.

It is not the same fun as a F-2-F game but you can try a few strategies against IA if it works or it is broken or only minor change.
To keep the better refined HR for F-2-F game.

For example, I tried a few times TP and Cruiser with M3 moves into 1942.2
Still, I would be very reluctant to ask my F-2-F friends to introduce this HR.
I quite like the speed and change of pace and extended range this provide on Triple A game but still don’t know if it is broken.
But actually, on Triple A, I cannot resolve my self to go down to M2. (M3 is kind of addictive,  :-D)
Yet, if I get a F-2-F opportunity, I would not push this agenda. I’m not convinced.

It is like a small laboratory, you can tests a few things before going outside world.
It allows to see more clearly what is fun and what is less.

Let us know if you want to try some kind of different bases into G40.

[E-dawg]

Howdy, YG.  Recently stumbled upon your YouTube videos when researching G40 rules and tips.  Just watched the House Rules victory objectives video and followed the link you had added in the video description to here.  I’ve bee searching up and down the thread for the .pdf file to download, but I’ve been unsuccessful.  Not sure if I’m just missing it somehow or if the file isn’t available anymore.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

[GeneralHandGrenade]

All of his stuff is now on his new website Cliffsidebunker.com
Here is a link to the file you are looking for;
http://cliffsidebunker.com/files/YG_House_rules.pdf

[E-dawg]

Great!  Thanks, GHG.

[Young Grasshopper]

@E-dawg:

Great!  Thanks, GHG.

I will be starting a video series soon explaining all my house rules… thanks for the interest, and thanks GHG for the directions.

[Fiera]

In our gaming round we used the Victory Objectives & Victory Tokens for the first time and the New Developments & Modified Breakthrough Charts

It worked really good and in the end we had a 2:0 Allied victory.
This was really nice, because we came to a point at which all started becoming tired and the board was far away of beeing clear who would actually win.
Allies were 1 token ahead with Africa which gave UK a Heavy Artillery.

So we decided to play two more rounds and then we would quit. Thereafter Axis did risk much more and it was really a funny game with a lot of dice rolling and epic battles. In our last round USA managed to conquer back the Philippines and the game was over.

In the past we had more than once the situation that the most tired player gave up or after long discussion we were finally shaking hands in a draw.
This always annoyed me and therefore I introduced this house rule to our round, with success!

[Young Grasshopper]

@Fiera:

In our gaming round we used the Victory Objectives & Victory Tokens for the first time and the New Developments & Modified Breakthrough Charts

It worked really good and in the end we had a 2:0 Allied victory.
This was really nice, because we came to a point at which all started becoming tired and the board was far away of beeing clear who would actually win.
Allies were 1 token ahead with Africa which gave UK a Heavy Artillery.

So we decided to play two more rounds and then we would quit. Thereafter Axis did risk much more and it was really a funny game with a lot of dice rolling and epic battles. In our last round USA managed to conquer back the Philippines and the game was over.

In the past we had more than once the situation that the most tired player gave up or after long discussion we were finally shaking hands in a draw.
This always annoyed me and therefore I introduced this house rule to our round, with success!

Thanks for the comments Fiera, sounds like your group was having a lot of the same problems we were before we made these house rules almost 2 years ago. Just want to point out a couple changes made this week if you want to adopt those as well… (changes are in red).

YOUNG GRASSHOPPER’S G40 VICTORY OBJECTIVES

Axis Powers

London -The Axis control London
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Moscow -The Axis control Moscow
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Sydney
-The Axis control Sydney
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Calcutta
-The Axis control Calcutta
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Africa
-The Axis control Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Tobruk, Alexandria, and Egypt.
(R&D) *The nation that controls the most
Europe
-The Axis control 7 victory cities on the Europe map
_(R&D) *The nation that controls the most

Pacific -The Axis control 6 victory cities on the Pacific map
(R&D) *The nation that controls the most

Armada
-There are no American Capital ships on the board
(R&D) *Japan

Economy
-All 3 Axis powers have a combined total of 142 IPCs on the income tracker (NOs not included)
(R&D) *The nation that is earning the most

Allied Powers

Berlin
-The Allies control Berlin
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Tokyo
-The Allies control Tokyo
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Rome
-The Allies control Rome
(R&D) *The nation that takes control

Paris
-The Allies have liberated Paris
(R&D) *The nation that liberates it
Africa -The Allied powers control all non-neutral territories on the continent of Africa
(R&D) *The nation that controls the most
Liberation
-The Allies have liberated London and/or Sydney
(R&D) *The United States
Philippines
-The Allies have liberated the Philippines
(R&D) *The United States

Armada
-There are no Japanese Capital ships on the board
(R&D) *The United States

Asia
-The Allies control the Burma road as well as Hong Kong and Shanghai
(R&D) *The United Kingdom_

[Fiera]

Thanks for the update, YG. I will introduce those to our group, lets see how the majority decides.  :wink:

[Fiera]

@Young:

Armada
-There are no American Capital ships on the board
(R&D) *Japan

The question came up, if it wouldn´t be better to say “no American Capital ships on the Pacific board”?
That way US would have to keep at least one in the Pacific if they would go for KGF.
Also Japan can only achieve 3 objectives on their own as they are dependent on what Germany does in the Atlantic (Armada) and on the main land (Economy).
To put it all in a nutshell:
Axis, 4 objectives on Europe, 3 on Pacific and 2 globaly.
Allies, 4 objectives on Europe, 4 on Pacific and 1 either Europe or Pacific (Liberation of London/Sydney).

[GeneralHandGrenade]

That would give Japan a guaranteed point if they chose to take it, Fiera. When you consider the amount of ships in the opening setup for the 2 nations, Japan could wipe out every US ship in the Pacific by the second turn no problem. In a game where the modified goal is to score points, the US would be virtually powerless to prevent Japan from scoring. That would almost be like giving Germany a point for taking Paris. A little more difficult yes, but still almost a certainty.

The only slim chance that the US could prevent it would be to completely take KGF off the table for the Allies by building 3 capital ships on the first turn in the Pacific. Turn 3 London falls, 2-0.

It wouldn’t be the same as taking all of the Japanese capital ships because Japan will have ample opportunity to build and locate them wherever they want to try and prevent losing that token.

[Genghis Khan]

the US can just take a battleship and hide it in iceland for the whole game. You might as well give the axis a victory token for capturing washington.

[Young Grasshopper]

@Fiera:

@Young:

Armada
-There are no American Capital ships on the board
(R&D) *Japan

The question came up, if it wouldn�t be better to say "no American Capital ships on the Pacific board”?

A house rule that forces the Americans to have at least 1 capital ship in the Pacific?… that sounds very guided.

That way US would have to keep at least one in the Pacific if they would go for KGF.
Also Japan can only achieve 3 objectives on their own as they are dependent on what Germany does in the Atlantic (Armada) and on the main land (Economy).

To put it all in a nutshell:
Axis, 4 objectives on Europe, 3 on Pacific and 2 globaly.
Allies, 4 objectives on Europe, 4 on Pacific and 1 either Europe or Pacific (Liberation of London/Sydney).

Yes, that was all done on purpose.