Playing the game with 2 turns: How would it affect balance?

Anyone playing anniversary with modern rules and/or units from 1942.2 or G40??
Any tips for balancing the game and/or changing the initial setup??

I’m excited to see the game being re-released but I like the modern rules for AA guns and tanks too much to go back I think, and I’m sure adding the units from G40 would be cool too.

I find it funny.

Painstate posting this question on the premise that axis players “drag” the game out once they start losing.

Then posts that he loves Axis players that refuse to give up.  Then asks “how many do you know who do that”

As for setting a 25 turn limit, based on the length your group plays, that seems ridiculously long. Try 12 turn as suggested or have a tactical/statistical review of some kind.

I don’t know what the challenge your group is facing is -but we almost always complete in one session.  Usually we schedule a weekend.  And get two full games in. One on each day, with the backup day for the game if it runs long.

Maybe get an egg timer for each side to increase focus!

Canada is a minor power because its military operation is minor overall and heavily dependent on US and UK. Canada’s only major operation in Asia was reinforcing Hong Kong, being an auxiliary force in Africa and committed in Europe so they were pretty centered in the conflict.

@Arreghas:

You are indeed proving to me that changing any rule set is complex indeed and requires very thoughtful analysis.

Yes, that’s quite correct.  An important point to remember is that a complex game such as Global 1940 is similar to other complex devices (such as automotive vehicles): they are systems consisting of multiple interrelated parts which are designed to work together in a particular way and which reflect many design choices and compromises.  Sometimes it’s possible to make minor or even major alterations to some of those components without affecting significantly the performance the overall system, but sometimes even a minor adjustment to a single critical component can wreck the whole thing.  (Take as an example the recent Galaxy Note 7 debacle.  There’s been speculation that Samsung may have changed the electrolyte in the lithium-ion batteries to something less stable, or that it may have gone too far in thinning the separator which keeps the positive and negative sides apart so that the battery doesn’t short-circuit and overheat.)  And design considerations have to take into account the fundamental question of what purpose the system is supposed to serve.  A luxury limousine, a Formula One race-car and a semi-trailer truck are all automotive vehicles, but they’re all optimized to do specific jobs and they all place different leves of emphasis on different capabilities such as passenger comfort, baggage / cargo-holding capacity, speed, fuel consumption efficiency and so forth.

Yes Young Grasshopper; that is exactly what I was trying to say.  I like the idea of a score at the end of the day.  Arwaker’s plan has some interesting potential as well.  I would imagine it is hard to get some groups together and this type of “scoring” would at least give these groups a chance to know who won the “war”.

No, I haven’t used them before, but if you’re not sure about them you could make a small order and if it works out ok, make a larger order (if you need one) afterward.  They have free shipping, so it won’t cost you extra if you make multiple orders.

In AARHE we plan to make the AA piece represent infrastructure defence.

This is much needed as the game do not model any of that (defences). Amphibious assault against German fortifications (eg. Western Europe) should be a very different story to a casual landing on one of the Pacific islands, or Africa.

Infrastructure defence would consist of coastal batteries, anti-air guns, etc.

As for balancing in this case, a modest study of historic specifications leading to a a good model would avoid any strange/funny situations.

Its just like mine except the “3 or less thing” so you roll two dice the total has to be 3 or less… hmmmm…too much especially with 2 artillery doing it. I like the fact that your rules are getting closer to the mark. good job!!