[Global 1940] Wildcat6305's House Rules and R&D System

@barnee
Thanks for the feedback. Currently we do not have a printed technology sheet. We just write the name of the technologies on flash cards and place a national control markers and chips to keep track of progress.

As for them being too involved, for a first-time player we disagree. We played with a couple people that had never played Axis and Allies, but after a single game of G40 (keep in mind this already entails 8+ hours of practice) and they were all ready to implement our house rules on the next game.

Our house rules started as a question of how can we re-work the existing research rules to encourage the use of all out of box units.
It was never our goal to have unique technologies/units for each nation. The work done by @The-Captain and company is more complex than what we attempted to do, so kudos to them as it looks like they did a terrific job developing their house rule expansion. We should give their rules a try one day.

@The-Captain

Thank you for clarifying.

Sorry for the late feedback. I was pretty occupied during the last weeks.  :-(

We did playtest the “Island Hoping” VO and in our opinion it worked very well. The Axis decided to do a G1 Barbarossa and a J1 Pearl Harbor. The idea was to force USA into a Pacific war and that way provide Germany the needed air to crush Russia. This idea worked and the US player did heavily invest in the Pacific to prevent Japan from getting the islands and later even more to get the islands himself. Because of this fact we would say that those new VOs are very good, because before there was not much to lose in the Pacific for the Americans, but a lot to win in Europe.

Resume, we will keep playing with the new VO in our next games and keep you informed!  :wink:

@Baron:

Hope UK Pacific new turn order will help smooth the game flow.
Do you intend to merge it with ANZAC when you have less players around the table?

I don’t think so, the group loves the speed of the game with the separate UK nations… but they want something a little closer to oob rules. Also, it’s believed that the new victory objectives help balance the game the way a combined UK Pacific and ANZAC combo once did. It still needs a few tweeks to the NOs.

Making oil barrels?

Why not just paint some capacitors?
That way, you can get them in any color and size you want, and they are really cheap :)

The oil concept seems cool will test it next time i have the chance….

@oztea

Hi! Sorry to disturb you, but just to clarify (sorry for the stupid question), Japan is supposed to be at war with the UK, ANZAC, and the Dutch in this setup, right? I’m asking because the TripleA map doesn’t have the UK and Japan at war and I’m not sure whether that’s an error or not. Thank you!

@userx:

@Baron:

I would rather prefer to limit them to their role of AA gun but, specialy for Germany, it seems they used a lot their 88mm AAA as antitank gun (El Alamein battle, i.e.).

I like that because you are correct, in Real Live, AA was just high-velocity ammo pointed at the sky, point it at a tank like the Germans did, it became an effective anti-tank.

I like the idea of taking out tank and/or armor for the pre-combat AA roll.

I don’t know if it would be unbalanced but I think I will try this next game

Thank you

I just learned that Germans put their Flak 88 on tracks and plates so it becomes the Tiger (Mark VI) and deliver them for the Battle of Kursk in 1943.
This gun seems quite an invention.

You forgot to mention the difference in sub mechanics. By the way, we still keep the house rule of not having planes strafe subs without the presence of destroyers in our game of AAR with my group.