Power Groupings - Global Game

[Guest]

I have a better solution:

Player 1 - Axis
Player 2 - Allies

What do you think? Axis and Allies. Has a familiar ring to it. Kind of catchy, huh?

[dakgoalie38]

No, that’s just stupid.  Get out of here with your crazy ideas.

[Guest]

@dakgoalie38:

No, that’s just stupid.  Get out of here with your crazy ideas.

You’re kidding right?, hahaha, only kidding? :|

[Fishmoto37]

Brain, you are a mental case! Oh I forgot, you have been damaged.@Brain:

I have a better solution:

Player 1 - Axis
Player 2 - Allies

What do you think? Axis and Allies. Has a familiar ring to it. Kind of catchy, huh?

@Brain:

@dakgoalie38:

No, that’s just stupid.  Get out of here with your crazy ideas.

You’re kidding right?, hahaha, only kidding? :|

[Guest]

@Fishmoto37:

Brain, you are a mental case! Oh I forgot, you have been damaged.@Brain:

Thank you for noticing. I take great pride in being a mental case. That’s a good thing. Right? :|

[i rock]

no the best turn order
1russia
2italy, canada, anzac, rest of the british empire
3 usa
4 japan, china, england

or
1russia, china
2usa, briton, canada
3 everyone else

[Fishmoto37]

I guess it must be a good thing. We all like to play these war games so we must all be mental cases!@Brain:

@Fishmoto37:

Brain, you are a mental case! Oh I forgot, you have been damaged.@Brain:

Thank you for noticing. I take great pride in being a mental case. That’s a good thing. Right? :|

[dakgoalie38]

Well let me be the first to say that I do not play any war games, have never played any war games, and do not plan on playing a war game of any kind at any point in the future.

[Guest]

@dakgoalie38:

Well let me be the first to say that I do not play any war games, have never played any war games, and do not plan on playing a war game of any kind at any point in the future.

I can’t believe that or you wouldn’t be here.

Anyway pairings should be easier to determine once the turn order has been established.

[SilverAngelSurfer]

I thought it had?  For the global game at least, which is what I started the discussion about…

[Guest]

@SilverAngelSurfer:

I thought it had?  For the global game at least, which is what I started the discussion about…

I haven’t seen anything official on the turn order for the global game.

[Make_It_Round]

It has been confirmed on Larry Harris’ site. It is:

1 Germany
2 USSR
3 Japan
4 UK
5 ANZAC
6 Italy
7 US
8 China
9 France

Edit: Corrected US/China reversal.

[Guest]

@Make_It_Round:

It has been confirmed on Larry Harris’ site. It is as we saw earlier in this thread:
1 Germany 2 USSR 3 Japan 4 UK 5 ANZAC 6 Italy 7 China 8 USA 9 France

I checked Larry’s site and could not find it:

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2079

Can you please provide a link?

[Make_It_Round]

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2101&start=16

[Guest]

@Make_It_Round:

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2101&start=16

Thank you. You’re right it has been decided.

[oztea]

So UK gets anzac…obviously
US gets China…semi-obviously
Russia “could” roll for france, the 3 turns that it exists that is…just to give that player something to do while he is neutral

[SilverAngelSurfer]

@oztea:

So UK gets anzac…obviously
US gets China…semi-obviously
Russia “could” roll for france, the 3 turns that it exists that is…just to give that player something to do while he is neutral

Well, that would be the traditional “obvious” way, but that’s the entire point of this thread: there are other ways to split it and what would be the pros and cons of splitting it differently?

[oztea]

4 Player Game

Japan
Germany - Italy

US - USSR - China
UK - France - ANZAC

[The Fire Knight]

If I ever play more than a two-player game (which sounds like a ton of fun but the first and last time i did it we only finished one turn and then everyone got distracted and it dissolved. It being one players first time did not help either.) then i will group it like this assuming six players…

Player 1- Germany
Player 2- Italy
Player 3- Japan
Player 4- U.S. and China
Player 5- Russia
Player 6- U.K., Anzac, France, and Canada (with whatever individualness it has or does not have)

I will do this for playability and historical accuracy. Each player will receive a power to play that will have plenty to do but not too much (Italy might be the weakest but there always fun to play and they will definitely help out with Germany who will have the most to do). Also, it makes sense (at least to me) when you think about influence. the U.K. was very closely tied with Canada and Anzac, and with France also (they were the first to declare war together against Germany). They may seem like they have a lot of countries, but the U.K. quickly becomes very weak (I find) if Germany begins to win. The U.S. gets China because (they always have) and although I suppose you could make a claim for Russia, it just makes more sense this way since the U.S. player will be far more bored (if you ever get bored playing a and a) than the Russian player who will be trying to frantically set up his defenses against the upcoming onslaught. Thoughts?

[Guest]

Here is my vote:

2 player game 1. Axis  2. Allies
3 player game 1. Axis  2. UK,ANZAC,France  3.USA,China,USSR
4 player game 1. Germany,Italy  2.Japan  3.UK,ANZAC,France  4.USA,China,USSR
5 player game 1. Germany,Italy  2.Japan  3.UK,ANZAC  4.USA,China  5.USSR,France
6 player game 1. Germany  2.Italy  3.Japan  4.UK,ANZAC  5.USA,China  6.USSR,France
7 player game 1. Germany  2.Italy  3.Japan  4.UK  5.USA  6.USSR  7.ANZAC,China,France
8 player game 1. Germany  2.Italy  3.Japan  4.UK  5.USA  6.USSR  7.ANZAC  8.China,France
9 player game 1. Germany  2.Italy  3.Japan  4.UK  5.USA  6.USSR  7.ANZAC  8.China  9.France
10 player game ADD CANADA