The case for a single UK economy



  • @Young:

    ItisILeCleric,

    We are discussing the possibility of a single UK economy and if it is good or bad for Global balance, in the suggestion… the India IC would be downgraded to a minor to begin the game, however, the option to spend $20 to upgrade is still viable.

    Here’s the idea…

    The British economy is no longer split between London and Calcutta, instead, the United Kingdom will now collect one income for all territories owned on the map.

    All IPCs must be relinquished each time an enemy power captures London, however, Calcutta is no longer a capital city, and the major IC on India has been downgraded to a minor.

    Japan still receives their $5 NO for capturing Calcutta, but will not gain the UK’s IPCs. The UK may still spend $20 to upgrade the India minor IC into a major.

    Krieghund, has given us a chalange to come up with the game breaking Allied strategy that makes this idea a problem… any thoughts?

    Ah, I see. I missed the IC-downgrading. Sorry for that…

    Brainstorming:
    What could be game-breaking in this case? It has to be something with focus. The ‘super’-UK has much more options to focus. Even after the need of upgrading the Indian IC.
    They could focus on either Germany (if SL is threatened) or Japan (no SL spotted). SL is an automatic failure for Germany now. Out of the question they would go for it (auto-loose the game if they do). So Germany will go barbarossa, leaving UK (going after Germany in turn sequence) building lots of land and air units in India to pummel Japan. In a short while, there is a huge number of land units and RAF (!) in India/ME. RAF units are so incredible flexible they can defend Moscow after attacking Italian units or defending China after attacking Japanese in SEAsia and so on. London can never be taken and the same counts for India/Egypt because the flow of units into Calcutta never stops.

    So far what I can come up with.
    I hope Krieghund will enlighten us if none of us finds what he is thinking about ;-).



  • I can see how a kill Germany first strategy could really flip the game in favor of the Allies, however, spending $20 to turn the India minor IC into a major is not chump change.



  • @Young:

    I can see how a kill Germany first strategy could really flip the game in favor of the Allies, however, spending $20 to turn the India minor IC into a major is not chump change.

    I don’t think Ill is talking about Kill Germany first. I think he is talking about how it devastates Japan while also being great vs Germany because UK will have a ton of guys in Middle east making it impossible to take Egypt. You let Germany do her thing, but she won’t take Moscow till T9 at the earliest because of UK air.

    I don’t think you understand how much this kills Japan Grasshopper…



  • @theROCmonster:

    @Young:

    I can see how a kill Germany first strategy could really flip the game in favor of the Allies, however, spending $20 to turn the India minor IC into a major is not chump change.

    I don’t think Ill is talking about Kill Germany first. I think he is talking about how it devastates Japan while also being great vs Germany because UK will have a ton of guys in Middle east making it impossible to take Egypt. You let Germany do her thing, but she won’t take Moscow till T9 at the earliest because of UK air.

    I don’t think you understand how much this kills Japan Grasshopper…

    Perhaps not, but your earlier post suggesting how its done requires a lot of things to happen together, and some things are vague like your America spends 100% in Pacific for 4 rounds, then 100% Atlantic for the rest of the game strategy. I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m sure Japan would be in tough with a house rule like this, I’m just saying I would still like to play test it just to see Japan sweat for a change. The way I see it, it would be fun for the UK to have the flexibility, and if Krieghund drops the bomb… something else can be house ruled to counter. I respect the intrigant balance of the rules the way one effects the other, but even the problem of the American major IC in Norway got fixed with a small restriction rule added.



  • The more I think about it the more fun I am having with the idea as well. The game would play out completely differently for a change.



  • Perhaps you could houserule the mIC in India cannot be upgraded if need be, but there can be another one mIC in west India, ofc…

    I have seen one of my opponents doing something similar by building mICs asap in Persia and Iraq (UK2 Taking Iraq, not leaving it for the Russians), possibly even in Egypt.
    Spending all in the ME comes pretty close to spending all in India, with a major difference however: India can still be taken early and after that Japan still has a shot at a quick sudden death victory in the Pacific.



  • @ItIsILeClerc:

    Perhaps you could houserule the mIC in India cannot be upgraded if need be, but there can be another one mIC in west India, ofc…

    I have seen one of my opponents doing something similar by building mICs asap in Persia and Iraq (UK2 Taking Iraq, not leaving it for the Russians), possibly even in Egypt.
    Spending all in the ME comes pretty close to spending all in India, with a major difference however: India can still be taken early and after that Japan still has a shot at a quick sudden death victory in the Pacific.

    I was thinking more like removing the India IC altogether, that way the first minor purchased will have to be India, and if they want it to be a major they will have to spend $30 instead of $20 (that would slow down the UK a tad if the single economy idea was to powerful).


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 '13 Moderator

    I do think you need a Minor YG.



  • @wittmann:

    I do think you need a Minor YG.

    We will playtest this Sunday with the minor in India of course, but if this game mechanic proves to powerful… a small tweak like removing the Calcutta factory altogether would be an option.



  • @Young:

    @wittmann:

    I do think you need a Minor YG.

    We will playtest this Sunday with the minor in India of course, but if this game mechanic proves to powerful… a small tweak like removing the Calcutta factory altogether would be an option.

    Very curious to see how your game plays out!  Update us asap! 🙂



  • Make Canada a separate power. This reduces the U.K.'s income by a little.



  • @Faramir:

    Make Canada a separate power. This reduces the U.K.'s income by a little.

    The purpose of the proposal was to give the Allies more flexibility to deal with the latest Axis strategies, and hopefully put a scare in the way they execute those strategies. If Canada were to get their own income or if Canada, South Africa, and ANZAC came together to create a commonwealth, wouldn’t that be less flexibility? I understand trimming $6 off the UK for fear that a single economy might be to over powering, but what is Canada to do with $6. I know I get frustrated when I can’t spend a dime in India because the Islands have been captured and the IC has been hammered into the ground, but I got $6 I don’t need for Europe so I buy a tank on South Africa because I’m losing and I should get units on the board somewhere. If Canada had their own income and turn sequence, that’s just $6 I would be forced to spend in Quebec wether I like it or not. At least if I had $6 in my hand I would want the choice to build a tank on South Africa, and not be forced to place 2 infantry in Canada… might as well keep it as is.



  • So after listening to a few opinions about this topic, I’ve decided to eat my words in the post above and try a commonwealth approach for our play test game tomorrow.

    The United Kingdom:

    The British economy is no longer split between London and Calcutta, instead, the United Kingdom will now collect one income for all territories owned on the map with London as it’s capital. All UK IPCs must be relinquished anytime an enemy power captures London, and the major IC on India is now downgraded to a minor. Japan will still gain their $5 NO for capturing India, but they will not collect the UK’s IPCs as Calcutta is no longer a capital city. The United Kingdom has only 1 achievable national objective which is “5 IPCs for control of Gibraltar, Egypt, India, and Malaya”, which they may collect even if they’re not at war with Japan. Also, due to the new British Commonwealth nation explained below, The United Kingdom’s starting income is now 38 IPCs.

    The British Commonwealth:

    All territories with an ANZAC and Canadian roundel on them will now be know as the British Commonwealth. This new nation will replace ANZAC in the game round sequence, and their collective 17 IPCs to start the game will now be spent and placed on any Commonwealth IC that the Commonwealth player wishes. All starting units on Canadian territories must be replaced with ANZAC gray pieces, and the initial setup has been modified to include a Commonwealth fighter in Ontario. The British Commonwealth has only 1 achievable national objective which is “5 IPCs for control of all original territories” which may only be collected when at war with both Germany and Japan.

    If either Ottawa, or Sydney are captured, all the Commonwealth’s IPCs must be relinquished to the enemy, and the British Commonwealth economy is immediately split between ANZAC and Canada for the rest of the game forcing the two to wage war independently from one another (even if the captured capital city in question is liberated). Two separate roundels for both ANZAC and Canada will be placed on the income tracker, and ANZAC will play after Italy, with Canada and France following to end each game round.



  • UK needs another NO then or he will never collect an NO in most games since Japan goes T1.



  • @theROCmonster:

    UK needs another NO then or he will never collect an NO in most games since Japan goes T1.

    OK, I changed it.


  • 2019 '15 '14

    I favor this change. Its seemed somewhat odd that Anzac would get into the mix as a separate player, but none of the other dominions.

    I like the idea of a single UK economy. I think its debatable whether Anzac needed to be in there as its own power in Global. Sure it makes the stand alone Pacific game more interesting, but in the joined G40 game, the British feel weirdly disjointed relative to other games. This aspect of Global is the one that makes it feel the most like two game “mashed together” rather than a unified thing. Bringing India back into the fold seems a decent start.

    Most of what I end up doing to tweak and play with global just makes me annoyed with the Production system. The whole design of Major and Minor factories gives me endless headaches. It takes every argument I’ve ever heard about how IPCs are distributed, and what they’re supposed to represent, and just breaks it over the knee. I mean seriously, G40 allows for Major factories in some of the most ridiculous places imaginable. And yet other production peculiarities and restrictions are enforced so strictly, as if raising a territory from say zero to 1 ipc was the end of the world 🙂



  • I totally agree with Black Elk, the new system with major and minor IC,s is just ridiculous. They should have stayed to the classic system and let the IPC value of the territory decide how many units you could mobilize there. Then you could place 8 units in a 8 IPC territory and one unit in a 1 IPC territory. Easy and simple to understand. And the SBR damage would be cut at the double value of the territory. Of course the cost of purchasing a new factory should depend on the IPC value of the territory. Maybe even Ports and Airbases capacity should be connected to the IPC value of the territory ?

    IMHO the separate Europe and Pacific games is balanced as is. But it was way wrong, maybe even borderline derogatory, to clash two different games together and name it Global. They really should have made one specific Global game with its own unique set up and Rulebook. And in this Global game, UK should be one player with one economy and one Capital. Just like USA, Germany and USSR. You don’t see USSR split up with Ukraine, Buriatya and Irkutsk as separate economies, so why should the British Empire be split up with small colonies as separate economies ?

    Of course the current Global set up will be unbalanced if you houserule UK as one economy. The Designer should have made Global a unique game from the start. So if you make UK one player, and I suggest to include Canada, India, ANZAC and every colony UK had before 1939, then you must change the starting set up too. As for the issue about UK mobilizing all units in UK, I figure the IC limit will stop that. And even more if we skip the major minor thing, and let the IPC value of the territory decide how many units to place.



  • @Young:

    @theROCmonster:

    UK needs another NO then or he will never collect an NO in most games since Japan goes T1.

    OK, I changed it.

    Remove Malaya from the list that UK needs to hold. He looses that T2 almost every game.



  • @Young:

    @wittmann:

    I do think you need a Minor YG.

    We will playtest this Sunday with the minor in India of course, but if this game mechanic proves to powerful… a small tweak like removing the Calcutta factory altogether would be an option.

    How about introducing the “Medium Factory”. The rules would read

    “Cost 15. Upgrades a Minor Factory to a Medium factory. Medium Factories can build up to 6 units. Medium Factories can only be built on an originally controlled starting territory that has an IPC value of 3 or more.”


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 8
  • 8
  • 6
  • 43
  • 3
  • 7
  • 5
  • 14
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

93
Online

13.9k
Users

34.2k
Topics

1.3m
Posts