How much would the game change if…....

I was hoping you’d post these!

Hopefully I can remember enough to add a quick finish to this after all this time.  Basically, Churchill’s morale was broken after England fell and realizing the mistake of thinking India’s IPC’s were England’s, so he went off to play cards.  Roosevelt took over control of all of the remaining Commonwealth nations and military forces.  Stalin still felt optimistic that he could push back the Germans.

The following summarizes R4+5 (I think it was 5 rounds at least)

Japan and the US clashed around the Caroline Islands in what was the largest naval battle of the game.  Japanese battleships Yamato, Musashi, and Nagato joined the carriers Zuikaku, Shokaku, and the Kaga complete with full loads of Tony, Oscar, and Zero fighters as well as Kate and Val bombers along with 5 destroyers against a multinational fleet consisting of US and Royal Naval forces lead by the “Big E”, the USS Enterprise loaded with Wildcat fighters and Dauntless bombers (still in their 1940 pre-war livery), the carrier USS Lexington with a Wildcat fighter group and Devastator bombers all in Battle of Midway camouflage, 5 DD’s, a sub and a bunch of transports, with the BB USS West Virginia not able to join the battle in time. The overwhelming Japanese force was successful, with the bulk of their forces surviving with battleships damaged.  Encountering success everywhere, they also wiped out the last remaining Chinese resistance.  On the follow up turn, an Australian tank corp raced across the country to defeat the sneaky Japanese and their infantry unit’s beached was eliminated.  The few surviving Mongolian troops and the Allied powers had little to celebrate.

Roosevelt took huge morale blows with Churchill’s resignation and now this catastrophic naval loss, but he was still hanging in there by a thread.  The Japanese were pretty much the masters of mainland Asia.

In Europe, Iraqi soldiers were charging towards India, backed by their Italian friends.  Germany kept pressing towards Russia.  They bought another carrier and a Destroyer to further intimidate the Americans, who were still equally distributing their money to each front, with some money left over given to land units to maintain parity with Stalin, with the idea of spending everything to land units against Russia on the following turn.  Italy steamed the Battleship Littorio, a cruiser, DDs, and subs past the “Pillars of Hercules” to further intimidate the Americans from making a move.  The naval intimidation moves succeeded on Roosevelt who decided to capitulate as he didn’t want to dare move the US fleet in range of all of those Axis ships, especially given all of the airpower that could support them.  Stalin tried to convince him to fight on, but after the demoralizing Pacific defeat, he didn’t have the heart to see the USS Ranger, California, and Arizona at the bottom of the sea (yes, the USS Arizona was stationed on the East Coast for this alternative history).  The Allies were essentially defeated and it was game over.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eWPStTU4pgFqS3rN8NnCtVlTJzmcFZnSHA
Pacific after the Allies capitulated

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Htmx1y4AuE4X81l1iBdf0bU8wiABqjiTxQ
Europe after the Allies capitulated

I’m betting this variant is not balanced, but there were so many mistakes and the skill level was so unbalanced between the Axis and Allies, that it’s hard to say that it favors the Axis.  It seemed like Sea Lion wouldn’t have worked with England collecting the proper income and making more strategic decisions such as supporting with Canadian troops and not scrambling all of their air force in the initial attacks.  The drawback of simultaneous play was that the newer players couldn’t be monitored as well as when play is one country at a time.  Perhaps playing one country at a time for the first round may be the way to go when there are new players, so they can be watched and have their questions answered.

That’s generally what war is about, one country(s) wanting to expand and colonize, and other county(s) trying to stop it to protect their own interests. England was a super power at the time, it won multiple wars allowing it to expand the Empire. With expansion comes a strain of resources and uprisings (like that little conflict in the America’s). Although the English were on the winning side of WWII much of the Empire was disassembled afterwords.

The axis partners had spheres of interest prior to the start of WWII. Germany would dominate Europe, Italy the Med region, and Japan would get Asia and the Pacific. If things had continued to go the axis way,  those lines very well could have gotten blurred leading to conflicts among the axis. We all know that the Germans were capable of back stabbing their treaty partners.

Yea the Germans were late to the party, but did colonize in the Pacific and Africa prior to WWI. As a result of WW1 they lost those colonies. It is reasonable to believe that had the war progressed in their favor the Germans would want those lost territories back at some point. Would the Japanese just freely relinquish those Pac territories? Maybe some kind of trade off?

I’m no historian, but I don’t think the Japanese had any interest in expanding into Africa during the war(?). That would fall under German/Italian influence where the Euro axis were already fighting. I’m not saying the Japanese didn’t have the means to make landings in Africa, only that it would probably raise red flags to their axis partners if they did. Plus such a landing would have been a major strain on Japanese ambitions and holding they already had in their own back yard. They chose to keep the NAP w/Russia to continue their conquest of Asia and the Pacific (against the wishes of their strongest ally). I don’t think the Japanese would have looked at Africa unless they got the US to sign a treaty giving them complete reign of Asia and the Pac. Then they may have looked towards Africa or the Mid East???

With that said, I like that fact that if the US goes full tilt Europe the game allows you as the Japanese to venture to into Africa, and other European territories. Same for if the Japanese are getting pounded the Germans/Italians can make gains on the Pac side if they want. I wouldn’t like a set of rules that limit you to one map side or the other. Many people already complain about the Acme Chinese wall as it is.

If a house rule limited axis cross overs, or base certain moves on a domino type of effect, I think that you would also have look at putting in some US spending limits per theater as well.

Just to say again, that I like this solution for G40.

In the tripleA edit mode it only take a few moments.

Just enable edit mode
edit the “territory ownership” of Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina and Chile to USA
click the neutral infantry and remove them, then “add units.” The default is American, since you already changed ownership.
then “Change PUs” of America from 52 to 60 ipcs.

Easy. It’s also fun to watch how the AI tries to make use of the new loot and the new units haha
:-D

So basically a 2 dollar bump for the allies turn1, then 4,6,8 and so on. Sounds pretty interesting. Another way to play the game. The more the merrier. One should never get bored playing A&A (although it might not be bad to take a break once in a while), just bust out a different scenario. :)

Exactly, especially if you’re trying out Strategic Movement rules in the game. France can take Spain, and then immediately bring it’s troops to the front the next turn. Keep 4 IPCS that will never be contested for the remainder of the war? Why wouldn’t you do that?

I’d rather see further clarifications on certain territories that historically were aligned or owned by one of the alliances, like Greece, like Persia, just like Belgium, Albania, Bulgaria and Romania currently are, but still have stricter rules for invading the remaining True Neutrals. France takes Spain = Germany building a single transport and moving infantry over to claim Norway and Sweden for a free 8 IPCS and 16 additional units. It would keep the countries that were traditional out of the war to remaining there like it does in G40.

Silly.

They are all here where house rules belong.

You could split the axis up the same way. Put Germany and Italy on one side while Japan is on the other. Both sides need 10 VC to win but can only attack each other when the allies are down to 4 VC. This would make the end gamee very tence and maybe even exciting.