Larry's suggested setup changes



  • According to this:http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2386&p=27006#p27006

    The setup changes are as follows:
    China
    Add 2 more infantry to Kweichow
    Add 1 infantry to Yunnan
    Add 2 infantry to Szechwan
    Japan:
    Remove 2 fighters (maybe just 1), 1 strategic bomber, 1 Tactical bomber from Japan
    Remove 1 fighter from Manchuria
    UK:
    Sea Zone 37 should have - 1 battleship, 1 transport
    Sea Zone 39 should have – 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 1 transport
    ANZAC
    Add one naval base to New South Wales.

    Also, there is a new Japanese NO:  Japan receives 10 IPCs each turn that it is not at war.
    This includes the British, Dutch, the US, and the French, meaning walking into FIC will lose this NO

    Let’s try it out.


  • Customizer

    His heart is in the right place, but I don’t think this is enough.

    I’d have to try it, though, but I suspect I’ll still get the India Crush to work, as every objective that needs to be killed will still be killed.  Only the extra 2 inf in Kwe and Sze MIGHT make a diff, but I doubt it.



  • 70+ views and 1 reply?


  • Customizer

    Trying a game online now.  We’ll see, but I’d have to play 4 games to get a good idea on the balance.



  • @jim010:

    Trying a game online now.  We’ll see, but I’d have to play 4 games to get a good idea on the balance.

    Great. Let’s see how it goes



  • Did you want to try it out calvinbobbesliker?



  • @kungfujew:

    Did you want to try it out calvinbobbesliker?

    I can’t play too many games now. School starts in 5 days and I’m taking many AP courses. Furthermore, my computer crashed so I have to retype my summer homework.



  • Wouldn’t it be great if everyone had all the kinks worked out before I even bought the game.  😄

    I would say do all that and give China an AA gun and call it quits



  • Tim and I won’t have another game session until the week of the 22nd-28th, and to be honest, this is the third or fourth endorsed version I’ve read about in the past week or so. Tim went to GenCon to get the Europe version he saw they were going to be selling there, and bumped into Larry (they didn’t have the game). They exchanged a few minutes of conversation in which Larry basically said he wants to make the changes to put an end to the J3 India Crush.

    I’ve played so much AAP40 that the thought of play testing who knows what, just doesn’t really get me all fired up right now. I mean, Tim and I have somewhere in the neighborhood of 250 actual game hours now, and most of that has been so in favor of the Japanese that it just isn’t even remotely fun anymore.

    Tim’s fire for the game is still burning hot, so we’ll play, but I’m curious to see what changes will take place between now and the week after next when we get a chance to fire it up again.

    That thread over on the Harris site is changing faster than I can keep up with.

    I will say this though, Larry is one cool dude, and his heart is in the right place as far as I’m concerned. So I’m kinda hanging back to see where Larry leads this “project” to stamp out the evil J3 India Crush! 😄

    Hobbes, is the OP the official version now dated 8-12-10 of the changes he’s leaning toward? The last I saw he had a list of like 10 things he was considering. Tim and I were going to just pick a couple and play test them. But it looks like the OP has combined several of the items off the list into one larger set up change. Is this the main consideration now, or just one of several?

    I guess I could just get off my butt and go over to the Harris site and look myself, but that thread took off to like ten zillion posts from where it was last week, I need the readers digest version! 😄


  • Customizer

    I have started up a game with ksmackay where I’m off to a bad start and I think I’ll still get the India Crush to work.

    Whether I win might be something else, but we’ll need to play a few to see if this works.



  • Question, would these changes be balanced for A&A:G1940?  (Assuming we accepted them and found the changes balance the game) Or are they only for Pacific 1940 and it’d mess up the balance for a A&A:G1940 game?


  • Official Q&A

    Any changes made would have to work for both games.



  • Why can’t the Pacific alone have a slightly different setup than the Global version?


  • Official Q&A

    It can, but it most likely won’t.



  • What about simply adding the 18 Russian infantry from the Global game and have Russia playing first before Japan, but without the purchase units/collect income phases?



  • Krieghund will these changes be added to the errata?


  • Official Q&A

    When the changes are finalized, they’ll most likely be added.


  • '12

    I wonder if simply requiring Japan to maintain a garrison (of x units or ipc value) in Manchuria, Korea and maybe Japan itself to watch over the the Russians would do the trick (no actual russian units would be required).  Failure of Japan to maintain this garrison would be a NO for China, unless Japan loses those tts.


  • Official Q&A

    It’s something that we’re considering.



  • I’d like to see a new rule book pdf made once all the errors are fix etc… something easy to read like LHTR for Revised… instead of having to read the out of the box rules and then come back the errata to compare… just have a most up to date rule book available without all the fancy photos etc… clean and fast to read.



  • Does the Global set up already account for the changes recommended by Larry?



  • @Monroe:

    Does the Global set up already account for the changes recommended by Larry?

    Well the 18 inf in Global are accounted for by the 2 free inf Russia gets per turn in Global, which will last more than 9 turns.



  • @Butcher:

    Why can’t the Pacific alone have a slightly different setup than the Global version?

    I guess that would be better because the presence of the Russians in global will make a big difference, I guess. This is of course an assumption, but having 18 extra infantry to deal with, should make a big difference…



  • @moralecheck:

    I wonder if simply requiring Japan to maintain a garrison (of x units or ipc value) in Manchuria, Korea and maybe Japan itself to watch over the the Russians would do the trick (no actual russian units would be required).  Failure of Japan to maintain this garrison would be a NO for China, unless Japan loses those tts.

    That’s actually a very good and simple solution! Historically they did keep the Machukwuo army in Manchuria throughout the war to guard against the Russians. Making The Japanese keep x IPCs worth of (land) units in certain territories could indeed make a big difference and solve the balance issues in Pacific40!



  • @calvinhobbesliker:

    @Monroe:

    Does the Global set up already account for the changes recommended by Larry?

    Well the 18 inf in Global are accounted for by the 2 free inf Russia gets per turn in Global, which will last more than 9 turns.

    This that a Global rule?


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 15
  • 12
  • 75
  • 3
  • 7
  • 2
  • 1
  • 15
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

62
Online

14.0k
Users

34.3k
Topics

1.4m
Posts