Do Cow's Playbook Still Work?

The combined arms rule (actually called “Commander In Chief”) was in the first edition of Classic but was removed from the second edition of Classic.  Apparently they thought back then that this rule was to easily taken advantage of by Allied players.

The way it worked was:
The US moves “X” units to United Kingdom.  The UK already has a number of units already there.  The US moves a number of transports that can carry all the current US and UK units on United Kingdom to the sea zone adjacent to the territory.
During the Collect Income phase of the US turn, the US and UK players agree to make the US Commander In Chief.  The US player takes a stack of 3 US control markers and places them in United Kingdom.
Then on the UK player’s turn, the UK player does not move any of the units intended for the combined force.  If the UK moves any of it’s units stationed on United Kingdom, they CAN NOT be included in the combined force.
Then on the US player’s next turn, the US player is now free to move any or all units stationed on United Kingdom as long as they DID NOT move during the UK player’s turn.
By the way, this includes UK aircraft if they didn’t move on the UK’s turn.

So, basically, any country’s units that are going to be included in the combined force but are not from the country of the Commander In Chief have to be in the launching territory before the Commanding player is chosen.  It might be a little more complex, but I think this rule could be applied to Global 1940.
For example:  Say England wants to attack a Japanese force in Burma from India.  They want to use a combined force of UK, US, Soviet and ANZAC units.  So on UK Pacific’s turn, UK can move units into India.  On the UK’s Collect Income phase, they get chosen as Commander In Chief.  The Soviet, US and ANZAC forces have to be already in India at this time and those are the ONLY non UK forces that the UK can move next turn.  Even if one of the other countries move more units into India, those new units could NOT be used in the UK’s next turn.
Assuming the UK attacks Burma with the combined force and defeats the Japanese, UK India will get possession of that territory.  Also, I believe the last casualty HAS to belong to the Commander In Chief’s country (in this case, UK).

No problem.  I am not an internet Nazi troll who makes fun of people for spell check errors.  I was just curious if that really was a real usage of C5H5N.

@Baron:

@JDOW:

And I admit that I am a bit disappointed that nobody either falsified my calculation/conclusion or gives me the credit that I prove AWN to be wrong about tanks :)

Being able to bring 12 additional Infantry, would have been better for odds of victory for Germany.

But I suppose you are assuming there is only M2 units types available.
I don’t have Triple A Calc, but is it possible that 3 MechInf with 4 Tanks would have been better for Germany’s success?

Main things is that skew is always better and in very specific conditions a few Tanks maybe needed.

Yep, the extra movement is of course a special value, otherwise 9 arty would be the by far most powerful addition to the army :-)

And also yes, a mixture could be the optimum.

Ty Kdczim, dunno why I thought otherwise! Maybe from old rules ? But ty!

PPP

The are two plans at work here.

The strict neutral strategy should not work against a good player because of all the extra infantry (18+) that the Allies get. But those infantry take a while to get into battle. The troops is South America take at least a few turns to get into the fight if there are no transports handy in the Atlantic. It may even be a turn or two before all the extra income comes on line for the Allies as well. And the Axis get to decide when to attack the neutrals, so they have initiative. I have never seen the Allies attack strict neutrals.

As far a turn 1 attack by Japan on the U.S. - Japan can defend Hawaii and the DEI for a least a few turns from the Western Allies and the Americans. Japan can build a Aircraft Carrier turn 1 with a Transport. Attack Midway turn 1 with Infantry and Artillery. Attack American Fleet around Hawaii with 3 Fighters, 3 Tactical Bombers, 2 Bombers, and 1 Destroyer and 1 Submarine on J1. Turn 2 attack Hawaii with 2 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 3 Fighters and 3 Tactical Bombers. If any Destroyer or Submarine survived the turn 1 Assault on the sea zone around Hawaii they can help defend the fleet from the scrambling aircraft at Hawaii, or defend any American Assault on U.S. 2. There should be 4 Aircraft Carriers with planes and 0-3 support craft (Destroyers and Submarines). This should be more than enough to hold off American attack for a few turns. If there are any losses on the aircraft on any of the battles fly new planes to land on the Aircraft Carriers in the non-combat movement phase. The rest of the Japanese fleet, 2 transports, 2 Battleships, 2 Cruisers, 1 Destroyer and 1 Submarine can take Philippines turn 1 and can take Malaya turn 2. It can move on to capture the islands on turn 3 and later. Once the Philippines are taken, planes can be flown from China to cover the fleet at an airbase. The Japanese have enough fleet to match the British, Anzac and the Americans for at least a few turns. Japan does not have enough resources to fight China too while this is happening. So the Chinese will start producing 18 + income a turn and dominate the mainland. But this is the strategic problem Japan has always had. It has the initiative and not enough resources. IF you have to choose which Ally gets more money, choose the Chinese, as they cant leave China (except for Hong Kong and Burma).

All I ever see the Japanese do is build for a few turn or two, attack China turn 1 and 2, and then fight a traditional war against the DEI and try to hold on…

Our games normally see the Germans build some fleet (including a couple tpts). Agreed Gibr gives many options (no AB makes it somewhat riskier), but if US comes to Norway via Gib (they can see it coming), then the Germans can delay it by simply building (or moving) a dd off coast of Normandy (sz 110) to block them for a turn. So the US (if is still going north) will normally kill the dd (move to sz 110), and have the UK build a carrier (add/planes) to try to keep the Germans from hitting them (provided the UK is still in the game). Then the US can probably take Norway (UK can land air to def), but the Germans again can be ready to counter it from the Baltic. Again our games usually see some navy builds for the Germans, and the western allies will need a good sized fleet to get close to shore.

You know, I’m kind of surprised that Larry didn’t include US Submarines in costing 3 IPCs for convoy raiding.  Historically, the US submarine force did the same thing to Japanese merchant shipping that German U-boats did to Allied shipping in the Atlantic.  In fact, the US submarines were actually successful at it whereas through convoying and ASW improvements, the U-boat threat in the Atlantic was gradually reduced.  US subs were so successful that in 1944 the US Navy had to cut back on submarine production because they already had too many and were running out of targets since they had so crippled the Japanese importing.