I hear what your saying. Just old school and we just disagree.
Oztea's Global 1941 Setup - Germany Play the Med?
I was wondering if the Axis and Allies community has much experience with Oztea’s Global 1941 Setup yet (see link to YG’s thread for the rules for a reference). I’m in the middle of my first game on triplea now. Another player in person tried to talk a group into trying it out on Table Top. We all wanted to do the G42 setup at that time. I wish we tried it now. After playing 4 rounds of G41 on triplea, I think I might really get hooked! I wish this setup could get an official endorsement, if it hasn’t already (not that it really matters, but it’s nice to not have it considered just another House Rules setup)…it seems very balanced and I don’t think a bid is required. If you’re preference is playing Allies, you don’t have to wait for an eternity for the US to get in the action. The US also starts with a good sized Army, just buy a few carriers and transports if you want to go to Europe first.
Action packed setup! BRING ON THE DICE THROWING! Immediately, the setup looks pretty historical and well thought out for those who care about that stuff even though this game is an abstract representation based on WW2 that barely “simulates” strategic (and to a small degree the Operational Level of war, not to be mistaken with tactical) simulation. I like how the UK starts bombed out (simulating the Battle of Britain) and the wounded Bismark is “being chased” in the sea (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1Ufc2hI4FM). Japan looks like it’s about to strike Pearl Harbor…Russia has so much stuff along the border that it begs Germany to launch Barbarossa. If you wanted to do Sea Lion, you’d still very much consider doing a G1 DOW on Russia and hit them hard.
Even though Japan looks ready to strike (as if it’s turn 3), I think it a good idea to not attack the western Allies in order to prevent the US from moving forward on turn 1. They collect and DOW on their collect income phase turn 1 (like it’s turn 3).
QUESTION: I think the setup really begs for Germany to pound Russia and not let up. But there is a temptation to make a play for Cairo and in a limited way, I fell for it. Germany starts with some stuff down there, and there is a chance to save the wounded Italian Battleship (which simulates a Taranto raid from the historical perspective of ships being damaged in the harbor). The harbor has to be repaired too which costs Italy money. I bought a carrier, and a destroyer to save what I started with. This then tied up 2 German planes. The next time I play the Axis side, I won’t spend down there. I now think spending on the Med as the German player is still mostly a “red herring.” What Say You?
Link below to a YG thread listing the rules for a reference.
This is my favorite OOB setup. Are you aware of the other Oztea threads ?
I remember him asking Larry and Krieg to try it but they never responded as far as I know.
Been a long time since I played but I think the German DD needs to protect the Italian BB. Anyway it Rocks imo : )
I was aware of the other threads…I did post the link to the thread YG started which also listed the setup.
I was hoping for a thread focused on the strategy discussion, not whether or not the setup is great (which I think so anyways).
I protected the Italian BB by using the destroyer to attack the UK destroyer/transport which had “landed” a unit on Crete (in the previous pretend round) to block UK ships and then ensured enough fighters on the airbase to convince the UK to not try to sink the wounded Italian BB with air alone.
Again, I’m of the opinion spending resources into the med is still not worth it…I think the UK can easily protect Cairo, even with the stuff that Germany can build upon.
we’ve played this one 2-3 times at the club?
Tons of fun pieces. Pieces where they should be (Russian East, Black sea I think, American reserves…etc.)
Everything is on the board. Leads to some traffic jams/crowding. This gets resolved pretty quickly as attrition takes its toll.
Axis bias? No way. When the setup gives the pieces to the allies that they need, the entire game changes. The Axis are on the defensive at first, they can still take Moscow and the other Russian cities, but they are in deep trouble as the USA has plenty of stuff ready at war start and so doesn’t need to waste time and money building up. Its an immediate invade, with backup, starting turn 1.
This version is plenty fun but it isn’t super balanced. Oztea did a great job here, not trying to diminish that.
It doesn’t lend itself to the cheese (fun but unrealistic gambits) of G40…G41 requires solid, ungimmicky play. It seems more realistic to have some true mobility armies and American beef; one thing that AxA OOB doesn’t mimic well is that while the Allies were stripped bare to start the war (in G40 and real life 1940), by 1942, they had a huge material and combined arms advantage, which never really plays out in G40 or G42. In G40, While the Allies do get tougher, the Axis get DRAMATICALLY tougher also on turns 1-4 and so there is a kind of maintenance of the standoff.
In G41, everyone starts equally beefy, the Allies surge, the Axis stretch thinner and thinner…
Excellent analysis on the differences between G40/G42 vs Oztea’s 41. I think in some ways, the 41 setup has “almost” fully realized the potential of the Global board. I like how it initially looks. It makes think of coming into a high level situation brief on in-progress ops. I imagine a table top board would seem very busy at first (I’ve only seen it on triplea, even there it’s cluttered). But like all axis and allies board games, they clean up real quick along the frontiers. Â
I did notice how this setup forces the Axis to stick to realistic solid objectives; but dangles out some “mirages” like Cairo. Â I’m of the opposite opinion. I think I’d even evacuate the german tank and 1 infantry on turn 1. Rarely I see people really invest in Cairo and going for the middle east, but on the forums some people talk about it. I’m never good at that.
I don’t know which way the game leans axis or allies. I’ll have to play it out a few more times before I’ll have a definite opinion. Do you remember which sides won at your club? Regardless, it seems very balanced and the US could get real aggressive anywhere it wants immediately. The US does start out with an Army, but Germany has a sizeable European garrison for defense and a nice navy in the Baltic for reinforcing Finland. Russia starts with a destroyer/sub combo in the artic, so they have a chance to kill a german sub in sz 125 and can therefore almost be guaranteed to collect their 5 IPC bonus for a few turns. Also, over time, the allies gain a few more IPCs as the French territories get occupied by allies. Russia might be tempted to stack it’s much larger mobile army at Amur on round 2, but I think it better to move it to Europe.