So how does the combined turn thing work?
The whole team has phase 1, then phase 2, phase3, etc?
They all play each phase as they choose, except during movement and combat its done at the same time to avoid seeing the results of one combat action and then using this knowledge to move/ not move…attack/ not attack
during movement and combat its done at the same time to avoid seeing the results of one combat action and then using this knowledge to move/ not move…attack/ not attack
More importantly, its so they can’t see combat result and then decision what to build.
for simplicity and less in-game argumuent lets just make them perform phases one after another,
and generally define the a little more clearly
I am anticipating complex diplomacy happening occasionally with introducing of National Victory
Game Sequence
1st turn
[USSR]
[Germany, Japan]
[UK, US]
Later turns
[Germany, Japan]
[USSR, UK, US]
[A, B] means A performs phase 1, B performs phase 1, A performs phase 2, B performs phase 2…etc.
Yep thats exactly the way to go. add that to the final draft.
With USSR, UK and US combats being resolved at the same time, (as with Germany and Japan), “D-Day” type coordinated attack is now possible all the time.
Is that ok?
As for “add that to the final draft” I’ll be compiling a phase 2 final draft once the outline of phase 2 is formed.
Currently lots of discussion in land and naval combat….
but little in Units, Neutrals, and National Victory.
Maybe Italy can be phase 3.
We’ve work so much with land and naval combat I think these shall now be phase 2.
In turn we move Italy and New Units to phase 3 alongside all the physical “map change” and “piece change” rules.
Of course we’ll also await for theduke’s comments and we also have to see his “phase 1.5” rules before pulling together phase 2 draft.
Yes indeed but the Italy idea has to be combined with the lend lease idea, because italy has to have its own income, while we offset extra axis income with aid to soviets and UK from the allies.
Up to you.
I am just saying that so we have all those things that require map changes or additional pieces left to the end.
Funny I can’t see a National Advantage thread.
Up to you.
I am just saying that so we have all those things that require map changes or additional pieces left to the end.
Funny I can’t see a National Advantage thread.
+++ NO its up to US… we are a team and make decisions as a team. But the idea of leaving the new units, map changes can be kept as optional rules… mainly because the map change will be the adding of Italy as 6th player.
Andersson is very slow with his ideas… i constantly prod him like a sheepherder in the field.
So lets precisely or a little more precisely define the time line.
How long is a round?
How long is a turn?
Are they the same?
IMO each turn = 6 months… each round of combat is say 1 month?
hmm are you getting confusing combat cycle wth game rounds?
a “round” consists of 5 “turns”?
now that each team takes their turn together
I am thinking a turn is 6 months and a round is a year
round1 being an exception
Ok its just our difference in nomenclature… I was thinking a game turn is when all players take a turn. each round i was identifing with combat rounds.
I think its technically a combat “cycle” :lol:
So what should we have the time modelled?
a round = 2 turns (axis, then allies)?
yes a round becomes two turns both axis and allied
So we shall set the time model is 1 turn = 6 months, 1 round = 12 months ?
Now I can get back to Russian Winter discussion I interrupted due to timeline.
Has anyone said anything about a different setup to accommodate a new round sequence? The game is setup to accommodate the original turn sequence, and if the allies all go before the axis, than they can hit places that were supposed to be fortified. For instance, UK would be able to attack Libya and Algeria and take both, Us could fortify or pull out of Hawaii, making Pearl Harbor non existant, UK could wipe out the Mediterranean fleet, things of that sort.
The Axis would not be able to come back from the Allies first round. I believe that the Allies should go at the same time and the Axis should go at the same time, but there needs to be an alternative setup for at least the Axis so they don’t get over powered.
Rawdog: i think its great that you too have come over to this site… along with your other comrade Gen. Patch im sure and welcome your contribution to this project.
"Has anyone said anything about a different setup to accommodate a new round sequence? The game is setup to accommodate the original turn sequence, and if the allies all go before the axis, than they can hit places that were supposed to be fortified. For instance, UK would be able to attack Libya and Algeria and take both, Us could fortify or pull out of Hawaii, making Pearl Harbor non existant, UK could wipe out the Mediterranean fleet, things of that sort.
++++Yes and you bring up a great point that has not been covered yet. Under these new rules the sequence is 1) Soviets, 2) axis , 3) allies ( including Soviets)
on the second turn we move into 1) Axis 2) Allies… thus the only problem is with the UK setup… I ask you can you make the effort to remedy this to protect UK especially against Japans attacks against India and the UK fleet in the Indian ocean.
The Axis would not be able to come back from the Allies first round. I believe that the Allies should go at the same time and the Axis should go at the same time, but there needs to be an alternative setup for at least the Axis so they don’t get over powered."
++++ ok why do you see the need for this? the general idea is to allow better coordination of each team and to facilitate quicker play.
OK, I misunderstood, I thought first turn would be all Allies, followed by all Axis, in which case, the Germans would lose all of Africa with the Mediterranean fleet, and the us could pull out of Pearl Harbour.
With this sequence, it would actually be a lot easier to setup. I will come back later today and post a rough draft.
Now that there is a time factor, USA should not be involved with combat or non-combat and should be limited for buying units until 1943 or if any one of there units not including China or Sinkiang china is attacked. In the meantime, UK transports may go a seazone adjacent to a US IC load up to 10 IPCs each transport and bring them back to a UK IC. This money is subject to being sunk and can only be spent at the IC it was brought to.
The game should start in 1941 or 42 because thats when the Germans were pushing into Russia.
Also, the pact between Russia and Germany was that they would not attack eachother, correct? Now before Germany broke that agreement, their ally, Finland was requesting help for the Russian-Finnish war. Hitler had a meeting with the Finnish leader and told him that he was not able to send troops due to the underestimation of the Russian forces. In reality though, the prize for the Russians in this pact was that the Germans would not assist the Finnish if the Russians attacked. Now shouldn’t Russia be in control of Finland? I understand that their is no Finland on the board, but that can be taken care of with a marker. What do you guys think?
- Soviets, 2) axis , 3) allies ( including Soviets)
Oh no…that wasn’t my interpretation of the outcome of our earlier discussion.
I thought it was
round 1
USSR
Axis
Allies but not USSR
round2
Axis
Allies
About Finland…are they significant? How do they compare to Sweden and Norway?
Finland is an axis minor ally. they also fought against Soviets on their own in 1940 and won that war.
