G40 National Objective card deck accessory



  • A&A 2nd Edition OOB National Objectives

    GERMANY

    1. SCANDINAVIAN RESOURCES = 5 IPCs
    2. TRADE WITH RUSSIA = 5 IPCs
    3. AFRIKA KORPS = 5 IPCs
    4. CAUCASUS OIL FIELDS = 5 IPCs
    5. LENINGRAD = 5 IPCs
    6. STALINGRAD = 5 IPCs
    7. MOSCOW = 5 IPCs
    8. IRAQ = 2 IPCs
    9. PERSIA = 2 IPCs
    10. NORTHWEST PERSIA = 2 IPCs

    SOVIET UNION

    11. NATIONAL PRESTIGE = 5 IPCs
    12. SPREAD OF COMMUNISM = 3 IPCs
    13. BERLIN = 10 IPCs (one time)

    JAPAN

    14. TRADE WITH AMERICA = 10 IPCs
    15. THE OUTER PERIMETER = 5 IPCs
    16. SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS = 5 IPCs
    17. CALCUTTA = 5 IPCs
    18. SYDNEY = 5 IPCs
    19. HONOLULU = 5 IPCs
    20. SAN FRANCISCO = 5 IPCs

    UNITED STATES

    21. AMERICA = 10 IPCs
    22. CENTRAL AMERICA = 5 IPCs
    23. ALASKA & THE ISLANDS = 5IPCs
    24. THE PHILIPPINES = 5 IPCs
    25. FRENCH LIBERATION = 5 IPCs

    CHINA

    26. THE BURMA ROAD = 6 IPCs (can build artillery)

    THE UNITED KINGDOM

    27. ORIGINAL TERRITORIES = 5 IPCs
    28. KWANGTUNG & MALAYA = 5 IPCs

    ITALY

    29. THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA = 5 IPCs
    30. THE MEDITERRANEAN COAST = 5 IPCs
    31. NORTH AFRICA = 5 IPCs
    32. IRAQ = 2 IPCs
    33. PERSIA = 2 IPCs
    34. NORTHWEST PERSIA = 2 IPCs

    ANZAC

    35. ORIGINAL TERRITORIES & MALAYA = 5 IPCs
    36. THE OUTER ISLANDS = 5 IPCs

    FRANCE

    37. FRENCH FORCES LIBERATED = 12 IPCs (worth of French units / one time)

    House Rule National Objectives

    UNITED KINGDOM

    38. GIBRALTAR, MALTA, EGYPT = 5 IPCs
    39. OPERATION ULTRA = 5 IPCs
    40. INDIA, MALAYA, NEW SOUTH WALES = 5 IPCs
    41. SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS = 5 IPCs

    GERMANY

    42. LONDON = 5 IPCs
    43. LONDON = 10 IPCS

    SOVIET UNION

    44. LEND LEASE ACT = 5 IPCs
    45. NATIONAL PRESTIGE = 5 IPCs

    JAPAN

    46. CHINESE CAPITULATION = 5 IPCs
    47. OUTER PERIMETER = 5 IPCs

    CHINA

    48. THE BURMA ROAD = 2 Free artillery units


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    @Young:

    A&A 2nd Edition OOB National Objectives
    GERMANY
    1. DENMARK STRAIT

    Maybe I’m just missing it, but I don’t see any such NO in the OOB rules.  There’s one which says “5 IPCs if Germany controls both Denmark and Norway while Sweden is neither pro-Allies nor Allies-controlled,” but that has nothing to do with the Denmark Strait, which is the strait between Iceland and Greenland (in A&A terms, Sea Zone 122).



  • @CWO:

    @Young:

    A&A 2nd Edition OOB National Objectives
    GERMANY
    1. DENMARK STRAIT

    Maybe I’m just missing it, but I don’t see any such NO in the OOB rules.  There’s one which says “5 IPCs if Germany controls both Denmark and Norway while Sweden is neither pro-Allies nor Allies-controlled,” but that has nothing to do with the Denmark Strait, which is the strait between Iceland and Greenland (in A&A terms, Sea Zone 122).

    Only a few people are aware of this, but the Denmark Strait between Greenland and Iceland was in fact a secret German convoy route to the South American trade marked, so yes it is definitely worth a 5 IPC no


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    @Narvik:

    Only a few people are aware of this, but the Denmark Strait between Greenland and Iceland was in fact a secret German convoy route to the South American trade marked, so yes it is definitely worth a 5 IPC no

    The Denmark Straight was also a breakout route used by German raiders to get into the Atlantic; Admiral Lutjens, notably, used it twice, the first time with Scharnhorst and Gneisenau and the second time with Bismarck and Prinz Eugen.  It’s where the battle with Hood and Prince of Wales was fought.  But my point was simply that (to my knowledge) the Denmark Straight isn’t an OOB national objective.  The narrow sea passage between Norway, Denmark and Sweden is called the Kattegat at its southern end and the Skagerrak at its northen end, if that’s what YG was referring to.


  • '14 Customizer

    Here is a few we used in our gaming group.


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    I’m curious about something.  Isn’t a bonus of 5 IPCs for shooting down a fighter (admittedly representing a whole squadron) kind of high in contrast with a bonus IPC of just 3 (in most cases) for controling whole blocks of territories?



  • @cyanight:

    Here is a few we used in our gaming group.

    All of your suggestions except the first have been represented in one way or another.

    I would also suggest separating each NO idea into their own post so that individuals can give a +1 for the ones they like.


  • '14 Customizer

    That’s a good Idea YG.

    Marc we actually have a gamer in our group that expressed the exact same concern that it should be 3 instead of 5.

    I would love to include one that Japan and USA could benefit from relating to destroying carriers.  That was the main reason why Pearl Harbor and Midway took place.  It was a showdown to dominate in carriers.  Kinda like the sub rule in the Atlantic.

    5 - IPC
    If Japan or USA destroy all carriers in the Pacific.


  • '14 Customizer



  • 5 - IPC
    If Japan or USA destroy all carriers in the Pacific.

    This would read better if it said…

    Japan

    5 IPCs if Japan has at least 1 aircraft carrier in the Pacific, and the United States has none

    United States

    5 IPCs if the United States has at least 1 aircraft carrier in the Pacific, and Japan has none

    Remember, each nation should be able to hold their own card for each objective achieved, so a generic NO like “Japan or United States” won’t work.


  • '14 Customizer

    Well said YG and I agree should be separate cards for each nation.



  • @CWO:

    @Narvik:

    Only a few people are aware of this, but the Denmark Strait between Greenland and Iceland was in fact a secret German convoy route to the South American trade marked, so yes it is definitely worth a 5 IPC no

    The Denmark Straight was also a breakout route used by German raiders to get into the Atlantic; Admiral Lutjens, notably, used it twice, the first time with Scharnhorst and Gneisenau and the second time with Bismarck and Prinz Eugen. It’s where the battle with Hood and Prince of Wales was fought. But my point was simply that (to my knowledge) the Denmark Straight isn’t an OOB national objective. The narrow sea passage between Norway, Denmark and Sweden is called the Kattegat at its southern end and the Skagerrak at its northen end, if that’s what YG was referring to.

    This is one of those catch titles that should allow laymen players to identify the OOB German NO for control of Denmark and Norway while Sweden is niether pro-allied, or allied controlled. If there’s an equal or simpler term to use different than what has been provided, I will consider it… but our group always calls it the Denmark Straight NO. I also believe that’s what the OOB rule book calls that passage as well, even though the NO theme is different.


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    @Young:

    This is one of those catch titles that should allow laymen players to identify the OOB German NO for control of Denmark and Norway while Sweden is niether pro-allied, or allied controlled. If there’s an equal or simpler term to use different than what has been provided, I will consider it… but our group always calls it the Denmark Straight NO. I also believe that’s what the OOB rule book calls that passage as well, even though the NO theme is different.

    The rulebook actually uses the phrase “Danish Straits”.  But anyway, it’s entirely up to you what you choose to call this passage.  I was just trying to figure out if you were referring to some sort of rule that applied to SZ122, or if it was simply a geographic terminology issue.



  • @CWO:

    @Young:

    This is one of those catch titles that should allow laymen players to identify the OOB German NO for control of Denmark and Norway while Sweden is niether pro-allied, or allied controlled. If there’s an equal or simpler term to use different than what has been provided, I will consider it… but our group always calls it the Denmark Straight NO. I also believe that’s what the OOB rule book calls that passage as well, even though the NO theme is different.

    The rulebook actually uses the phrase “Danish Straits”.  But anyway, it’s entirely up to you what you choose to call this passage.  I was just trying to figure out if you were referring to some sort of rule that applied to SZ122, or if it was simply a geographic terminology issue.

    AAAHHH… my bad, Danish Straits it shall be. hope you don’t think I was bieng an A55, I respect and look forward to all your input, as you are my favorite A&A.org historian.


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    @Young:

    AAAHHH… my bad, Danish Straits it shall be. hope you don’t think I was bieng an A55, I respect and look forward to all your input, as you are my favorite A&A.org historian.

    No problem.  I’ve seen enough war movies to understand the principle that artistic license sometimes has to take priority over strict historical accuracy, and I respect that.  When I point out (potential) issues that have caught my attention, it’s not with the aim of convincing you to change a particular house rule detail (after all, your rules are yours to do with as you please) but just to make sure you’re aware of something that might simply be an oversight rather than an intentional artistic compromise.  If it bothered me to have some of these sugggestions turned down, I wouldn’t be taking the trouble to make them in the first place.

    Amusing footnote: I once head a military historian complain that it can negatively impact one’s career to agree to be a consultant for a movie because the following happens frequently:  Professor So-and-so agrees to be the historical consultant for a military-themed movie.  He reviews the script, finds a bunch of errors (both subtle and outrageous) and points them out to the director.  The director replies, “Well, yes, you’re right, but cinematically it would be more effective and exciting to leave the script as it is.”  The movie gets shot according to the script, and then gets released.  All the historians and history buffs in the audience groan at the mistakes, then notice that the end credits say “Historical Consultant: Professor So-and-so”, and they conclude that Professor So-and-so is an incompetent historian.



  • Could use Scandinavian Peninsula NO

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavian_Peninsula



  • I’ve gotten lots of requests lately for my NO deck, so I had to bump this thread for easy reference.

    Cheers



  • Trying to finish this deck, so I had to bump the thread… appologies.



  • Hi,

    We use these. I made them after I saw one of your videos and couldn’t find any NO-cards for the second edition for download. www#mediafire#com/download/7dtxrwxnbe0n2pe/A&A_NO_pdf.tar.gz

    We also use War Cards to show whos in war with who: www#mediafire#com/download/oeby87i8esm122e/A&A_G40_War_Cards_-_pdf.tar.gz (replace the #s with dots (.))

    Also since we haven’t played the game much, I wanted to create a “briefing file” for every country, with a overview/list of the National objectives which is a bit more visual than the lists in the manual.

    chrz



  • 2 Londons?



  • @NilOGrav:

    Hi,

    We use these. I made them after I saw one of your videos and couldn’t find any NO-cards for the second edition for download. www#mediafire#com/download/7dtxrwxnbe0n2pe/A&A_NO_pdf.tar.gz

    We also use War Cards to show whos in war with who: www#mediafire#com/download/oeby87i8esm122e/A&A_G40_War_Cards_-_pdf.tar.gz (replace the #s with dots (.))

    Also since we haven’t played the game much, I wanted to create a “briefing file” for every country, with a overview/list of the National objectives which is a bit more visual than the lists in the manual.

    chrz

    Did these links work for other? I can’t seem to connect with them.



  • It worked for me don’t forget to delete the two # and replace with .



  • Hey NilOGrav great work I love them. I printed one out in A4 size and it seems too large, what size are they made for just to save me some time experimenting. Thanks



  • Hi Stormtrooper,

    Thanks for the compliment, glad you liked them.

    They are supposed to be printed on A6 (quarter of A4), although they are designed on A5. But that was for convenience during the process of creating them.

    There are some minor errors though, which I will be correcting:

    • The German title Oberfellherr is non-existent and will be changed to Feldmarschall or Generalfeldmarschall, depends on the length of the line.
    • The 6 IPC text of the Chinese NO has the same color as 5 IPC text on other cards.
    • Some pictures are strechted to the edges of the paper and have to be aligned to the maximum margins and the white border has to be cut off.

    BTW use them anyway you like, the original files are included as well (www#mediafire#com/download/zcjf495wirizjrb/A&A_NO_odt.tar.gz and again replace # with .)

    chrz


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 2
  • 6
  • 17
  • 4
  • 19
  • 8
  • 5
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

59
Online

14.6k
Users

35.2k
Topics

1.4m
Posts