Grasshopper & Gargantua's 3G40 Deluxe Edition (Updated October 20th, 2018)

  • Sponsor

    @Deaths:

    Simply gorgeous map!

    Playing this game as I Type.

    4.5 hrs 1st turn.

    You have way overcomplicated this by way way too much.

    Naval and air designating is retarded.

    Capacity points for IC’s is another no go. There are better ways to counter ijn tank rush.

    The odds of Germany obtaining french stuff is to great.

    If convoys are not part of a countries income, then how are they capable of removing $ from the same country that gains nothing for owning it?

    There are 2 many convoy zones on map imho.

    Uboats getting 2 sneak shots reguardless of dd present is broken and to strong imho.

    Canada and UK or Australia and India should be teamed together, not the current way.

    A cheat sheet for unit stats and costs is desperately needed.

    Infantry are to weak!!!

    Thank you for your attempt at playing Sir… the design team is now working hard on making the designated aircraft rules less “retarded”

  • Moderator

    Sub rules are not so good. Only surfaced subs can be shot at or shoot?

    Subs typically only attacked from the surface vs merchant shipping.

  • Sponsor

    @Deaths:

    Sub rules are not so good. Only surfaced subs can be shot at or shoot?

    Subs typically only attacked from the surface vs merchant shipping.

    The sub and destroyer rules are an improvement over G40, that’s what we were going for.

  • Moderator

    @Young:

    I personally believe you have regressed in this area.

    Unless you seriously streamline this, No one will play this. Spend more time rules searching then actually playing the game.

    Use the KISS method every chance you can.

    Game feels very axis biased


  • @Young:

    @Deaths:

    Sub rules are not so good. Only surfaced subs can be shot at or shoot?

    Subs typically only attacked from the surface vs merchant shipping.

    The sub and destroyer rules are an improvement over G40, that’s what we were going for.

    I’ll bite: define improvement? What issue(s) are you attempting to fix, and how are you attempting to fix them?

    -Midnight_Reaper

  • Moderator

    I came down here with an open mind and excited to try something new. Thank you for the time and effort putting this together.

    This version is more work then fun.
    All the extra phases and added sequences have this game bogged down. 10 fricking hrs, 3 turns down.

    Other then the enjoyable company, this is a Saturday I wish I could have back.

    If you try to be to historical, you zap the fun out of it.

    Good luck to you,
    Wont be asking to play this version again anytime soon.

  • Sponsor

    Look guys… as you can see we’ve done a lot of work here and we’re play testing the crap out of it… I don’t wish to get involved in a conversation where I’m defending this variant to those that are obviously not interested. There are those that have printed the map, purchased the extra components, and have contributed positively to the process… and I’m in many conversations with them.

    Thank you Death Head for trying it out, I’m sorry it wasn’t for you.


  • to try and move from the “stale G40” requires considerable amount of new and different ways of trying to rightfully represent the largest conflict in world history…

    to say this took too long…well “we” all forget that it took “too long” to play G40 in the beginning…we feel very confident that when 5 players play this AND they have a decent understanding of the game - it wont take so “frickin long”


  • “axis biased”

    safe to say the allies were players that have not played this version much…

    the starting ipcs alone should probably alter this “axis biased” feeling…
    G40 - Allies 177 ipcs  Axis 66 ipcs  (111 spread)
    Deluxe - Allies  226 ipcs  Axis  90 ipcs  (136 spread)
    “25 bid to allies”

    plus the allies received more units in setup while adding another allied nation…

    again this needs to be playtested more before any “real” bias can be determined with the hope no bias is determined when played properly…

    imo rather brash to come to conclusions on a first time playing.

  • Moderator

    Apologies for my “brash” responses.

    The rule booklets alone are daunting task

    No G40 never took this long.

    We had 3 very experienced players including one of your designers.

    10 hrs is unnacceptable for 3 turns

    Not biased towards axis? Plz explain why then axis get 3 chances at 40% success rate to gain vichy stuff yet allies only get less then 10% chance?
    Y do german uboats get 2 turns of non dd interferance but allies get 0 turns?

    Y do axis get super units at game start but allies get 0. Sorry but Bizzy wasnt a supership!

    Turn blocks as you call them is a good idea, your pairings are terrible.

    Designated aircraft and ships is a uneccassary additive. Ships bombarding during ur special mission phase is beyond stupid.

    Stop looking at spreadsheets and actually playtest it.

    I drove 2.5hrs to play this game. What I did do was read rules all day……boring, even your fellow developer was in the books more often then not. Even your fellow developer says its to long and unneccasarily to complicated.

    You wont get 5 players to stick it out long enough to be “quick”

    Go back to d12 or d6 or fix ur infantry. You want to be historically accurate, then give infantry the stats they deserve, not the flaccid crap u currently have them at. You portray inf as useless cannon fodder.

    Build points in factory is also beyond not smart.


  • like YG stated…sorry its not for you
    “complicated” is hbg’s 1936 & 1939
    we feel its not as complicated as those, but there’s A LOT of stuff…
    sorry you feel you wasted your time…
    maybe when this gains traction in the future you might be willing to get acclimated and become more seasoned

  • Moderator

    @bigalmeacham:

    to try and move from the “stale G40” requires considerable amount of new and different ways of trying to rightfully represent the largest conflict in world history…

    to say this took too long…well “we” all forget that it took “too long” to play G40 in the beginning…we feel very confident that when 5 players play this AND they have a decent understanding of the game - it wont take so “frickin long”

    The only thing stale in g40 is the fact that Italy is basically knocked out on UK first turn.
    No im not a g40 fan boy.

    Yes I would love to see your varient succeed. The map is to gorgeous to waste

  • '19 '18 '17 '16 '15

    Congrats fot this effort! Sounds lots of fun!!

    Juan

  • Sponsor

    @JuanSpain:

    Congrats fot this effort! Sounds lots of fun!!

    Juan

    We thank you Sir.

  • '19 '17 '16

    @Deaths:

    I came down here with an open mind and excited to try something new. Thank you for the time and effort putting this together.

    This version is more work then fun.
    All the extra phases and added sequences have this game bogged down. 10 fricking hrs, 3 turns down.

    Other then the enjoyable company, this is a Saturday I wish I could have back.

    If you try to be to historical, you zap the fun out of it.

    Good luck to you,
    Wont be asking to play this version again anytime soon.

    Has anyone else tried this? Seems excessively complicated IMO.

    If you want something more complicated why not try Global War 1936 2nd ed?

    I’m inclined to agree about sub/DDs regressing. Haven’t played it but I don’t see the reason for the change from G40. Only real problem is that one DD could stop 10 subs from using their special abilities.

    Curious about one thing. Why is separating Canada a negative? I always thought it was a bit crappy that Canadian income could be spent in London and was lost in a Sea Lion.

  • Sponsor

    @simon33:

    @Deaths:

    I came down here with an open mind and excited to try something new. Thank you for the time and effort putting this together.

    This version is more work then fun.
    All the extra phases and added sequences have this game bogged down. 10 fricking hrs, 3 turns down.

    Other then the enjoyable company, this is a Saturday I wish I could have back.

    If you try to be to historical, you zap the fun out of it.

    Good luck to you,
    Wont be asking to play this version again anytime soon.

    Has anyone else tried this? Seems excessively complicated IMO.

    If you want something more complicated why not try Global War 1936 2nd ed?

    I’m inclined to agree about sub/DDs regressing. Haven’t played it but I don’t see the reason for the change from G40. Only real problem is that one DD could stop 10 subs from using their special abilities.

    Curious about one thing. Why is separating Canada a negative? I always thought it was a bit crappy that Canadian income could be spent in London and was lost in a Sea Lion.

    Yes, it’s complicated… not as much as 1936 though… but even if, what’s wrong with multiple game options with the same complexity level?

    The reason for sub/destroyer changes from G40…
    …in G40, Subs can’t submerge with a destroyer present, not realistic considering that destroyers had to deal with submerged subs all the time. In 3G40 subs can submerge with a destroyer present, and can escape most air units attacking them which increases their survivability rate by a lot.

    So I don’t understand the “not seeing a reason for the change” comment when we all know how difficult it is to keep a submarine on the board (defending @1 and in the sights of any aircraft). I think we’ve done an excellent job translating true sub/destroyer tactics including depth charge attacks.

  • '19 '17 '16

    You should play whatever you find fun, but i wonder if the fun here has been in developing the game or in playing it?

    How many play test games have been done? I find it a bit daunting just reading through all the rules. With 1936 at least there would have been some play tests. I would question the fun in that too with some things taking four turns to build.

  • Sponsor

    @simon33:

    You should play whatever you find fun, but i wonder if the fun here has been in developing the game or in playing it?

    How many play test games have been done? I find it a bit daunting just reading through all the rules. With 1936 at least there would have been some play tests. I would question the fun in that too with some things taking four turns to build.

    Play testing is on going, we have a team who are dedicated to the process as proven by their willingness to travel to Canada in 2 weeks for this awesome project. I wouldn’t finalize any rules as complete until we get at least 2 more years of testing… but if we haven’t impressed you with what we’ve done so far, I doubt you will appreciate the end result.

    …and of course it’s fun developing rules, why else would anyone do it?

  • Sponsor

    Had a massive play test last weekend, and it was awesome… here are some live streamed videos of it. After the success and fun we all had, I don’t even want to listen to the haters trying to derail this variant.

    Day 1
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wTyG6pTzcU
    Day 2
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-1ugBVzLS4

  • '19 '17 '16

    Glad you had fun. How long did it take to play a game?

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

61

Online

17.0k

Users

39.2k

Topics

1.7m

Posts