A&A Global IPC (& More) Log Sheet 11x17

@nzcamel

Yes, ignore that, as this is related to the forum software change that occurred in 2018. Some characters haven’t been converted correctly.

@Bob_A_Mickelson:

I’ve been looking to add these custom IPC poker chips to spruce up my game, however they are quite expensive.

http://iwillnevergrowup.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=50

How many poker chips do I need for global 1940? Will I need more than one set? What is your guys experience?

Thanks in advance.

I have the set too… I also found the default set a bit short… if I’m not mistaken, I have the default set, two sets of the 25IPC add-ons, and I custom-ordered an extra ten 10IPC chips (as mentioned by others, contact IWNGU directly to get IPCs in a non-set fashion, as I did by ordering extra 10IPC chips).

Bottom line, I was happy with the number of 1s and 5s in the default set, but needed more 10s, and got two sets of the 25s.

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

Is Global domination rules just playing until one side controls all the territories? Any clarification would be appreciated.

In practice, a global domination variant is one where the sides ignore the official victory conditions, which are based on controlling a certain number of victory cities for a turn, and instead play until one side concedes.  You could play until all territories are controlled, but that outcome is usually determined well before the last enemy territory is captured.  Typically, experienced players can decide if a game is worth continuing after one of the major capitals falls.

As some have pointed out, this type of game can be less interesting because the Allies’ economic might encourages them to grind out a longer game until they can pour all their resources into crushing Germany or Japan.

Conversely, it presents a greater challenge for the Axis while also making the Allies less defensive as Cow mentioned.  The problem as I see it is that any game that lasts longer than 10 turns becomes a de facto Allied victory because of the economic imbalance.  Consequently, we’ve been trying to formulate a bid to help even things out, but not break the game in the first 3 turns.  It’s a bit of a round peg/square hole problem, but it’s good to get people talking about it for those of us who cling to the old “global domination” victory rule.

Looking at it briefly, I have no idea how you get a winning team. Tis not obvious…

17, the bid follows classic bid. you can go 20-13… jeez

STOP MAKING THIS MORE COMPLICATED. HE ASK SIMPLE QUESTION AND YOU MOCK HIM. THEN WONDER WHY FORUM HAS ONLY THE SAME PEOPLE.

But yeah I’d house rule against japan cheese and give axis a bid. It’s simple, you move in allies sz territories you declare war. thada!

Thnx for the quick answers guys, my friend will prob find the answer to be a downer lol good thing we stopped after anzacs turn, we’re still in the first round of play w the new set up and so far things seem pretty well balanced. Thnx again for the answers, I’m off to plot my italain revenge against his remaining royal navy after a failed attack againt my regia marina muahaha :evil:

It could facilitate blind games, which are loads of fun but currently very tedious and time-consuming.  (I’ve played one on AAR)

blind games=basically you can’t see the units in enemy territory, except perhaps in the ones adjacent to your own.  for now it takes 2 separate boards and one non-player person willing to be the moderator to keep the boards synced.

well, if russia buys three art turn 1 and saves the rest and collects the same turn 2, that would be a turn two buy of 25+37= 62 to spend in 16 slots. which is either 9 tanks and 2 mech inf if Germany is going sea lion, or 14 art + 1 tank if Germany is going for russia. so your save idea seems to have some merit.