Pieces to purchase / 3D printing ?

I saw several of those expansions in their bins during the play-test weekend.  I would recommend contacting Mr. Friend about them.  I know for a fact that they have some Croatia and a few Winter War.  Didn’t really look into the others.

We are a group of 6 usually, with sometimes more or less of us. We regularly meet every 2 weeks ish. We have a table to leave the game setup between days. Or setup by the host before the game. Due to this if someone cant make it the others cover so life and the game both continue without excessive conflict. We use the HBG 1936-45 map currently, but we started with A&A global 1940. First run was rediculously slow so we did a few things to adjust it to our preferred level of fun/flow

1)Similarly to munck we also use screw bins all stored the same. No messing around in the bin looking for a sub etc. Speeds up the flow. Decide purchases while others are playing, though sometimes plans are changed by others, so this isn’t a hard rule.

2)We kept the turn order the same. US controls french and china. But once US are done China and Germany play with an overlap they dont really interact. We also allow the next player to start his turn while the current player is collecting income etc.so long as they have placed units and will not interact with the map anymore. This realy speeds up the flow.  The next player is declaring purchases and rolling tech, while the previous player rolls income increases and collects income.

3)So some printed rules are not incorporated by us. If someone wants to try one we give it a shot, it gets voted in or voted out.

Initially we decided to ignore major rules changes from A&A versions. And just used the varrient map and setup. We skipped Combat air patrol and kept the destroyer for sub detection as an example. Too much explaining and  retraining, though we may add it later. The same is done to anything that takes time to absorb internally. Especially if it was played different in a previous version.

Most importantly we play for FUN. Anything that slows it down needlessly or causes confusion is removed, and tried in small batches. This way we can test if anything destroys ballance or is unnecessarily complex. We vote it out and try something else, or we like it and keep it.

@koba:

I’d like to see the rules Henson had for milch cows and seaplane tenders.

Incidentally, you may be able to get some of what you are looking for at his old blog axisallies1940.

Thanks Koba, I will have to check that out. :-)

Ben,

I sent you a message.

It’s really just a list of questions and suggestions. It’s more difficult to do this over an iPod than I expected.

Regardless, I hope it knocks down the despair a bit.

Another possible solution could arise if the map is ever redrawn. Please note that I am not suggesting the map be redrawn just to solve this problem.

However if the map does get changed at any point I suggest splitting Reims into two separate territories.  The northern territory would border Holland and the southern territory would border West Germany and Bavaria.  Then you could increase the fortifications for the southern territory.  This would seem to be the most elegant solution.

Another idea is to just increase the fortifications in Reims to encourage Germany to go into Holland. As a counter, since not every game should have this, if France falls but Holland was never invaded, Holland becomes a reluctant German ally.

The logic behind this is that Belgium and Holland were too intimidated to enter the war on the Allies side and thus risk fighting the war on their soil.  How much more intimidated would they have been with no allies on the continent and the knowledge that  Britain could not protect them?

Under such a scenario I would see Germany collecting all of the income and resources for all of Belgium/Holland. This would be detrimental to Japan and could prove interesting.

I will attempt to answer what I can here. I will note rules in red, and my opinion in blue

@WILD:

I do have some other questions about the Chinese factions. Some are carry over from before, but not answered definitively by the game’s creators.

Was the word original intended to be in the text under Nat Chinese (#8 pg29). It says the Nat Chinese can capture original Red Chinese territories instead of liberating them. There are only two original Red Chinese territories in the game, so are the Nat Chinese allowed to capture (or retake) unoccupied territories from the Reds that aren’t original Red Chinese. This could be interpreted that they can not capture Red Chinese territories that aren’t original, which would prevent them from taking back their own territories from the Reds (which would be silly, but fixes the double dipping thing LOL).

Liberating a territory by definition means restoring it to it’s original owner after taking it from an invader. If Nat Chinese take control of a Japanese held territory that was originally Com Chinese owned, they capture for themselves instead of returning control of it to Com China. And, although omitted from the rules, the vice versa would also be true. I will be sure to include that in the next revision.

This question may actually help solve the “double china income” problem. I am still working on that. If we only allow a Chinese faction to take a territory from the other Chinese faction when captured from an Axis country, it would solve the problem, right? In other words, Chinese can’t take from each other unless they are taking it from the Japanese. Let me know.

Both Chinese powers are on on the Allies side, can they both be on the same territory. Russian units could back up the either Chinese powers, are the Chinese allowed to reinforce each other?

No, they can’t occupy the same territory. That is what is meant in the rules when it says they cannot attack each other.

When the Japanese capture a Chinese capital do they get the income stored there. Rules don’t say specifically (that I saw anyway), but do say the only exceptions are for Russia & UK (stored income goes to bank), so I would think YES the Japanese also capture the income from both Chinese factions. Being the Chinese can capture unoccupied territories from each other, would that include capturing income if that territory is a capital. This could be a good move to keep Chinese income from falling into Japanese hands. I Know that in G40 the Chinese income isn’t transferred (Chinese keep it for later), but that game doesn’t have Chinese capitals either.

Since the Chinese taking each other’s territories is still a bit up in the air, I will only comment on Axis powers capturing Chinese capitals. Yes, they would capture the income stored there as well.

The Communist China rules (pg29) don’t list territories the Red Chinese can enter or not enter (FEC or French to be exact). Rules do say the Reds can attack an axis power w/Russia as long as both are at war with that axis power. So they can liberate or capture Japanese held territories with a joint venture, and I would imagine they could also attack Japanese held territories by themselves outside of the Chinese borders just like the Nat Chinese (although this would be difficult with just inf). Are the Red Chinese limited to French territories, and Hong Kong (like the Nat Chinese) or can they enter any original UK FEC territory by design (just as Russia could). Furthermore can the Red Chinese leave China and NCM into orig FEC or Russian owned territories to seek refuge or reinforce (this last one is doubtful).

Since the rules don’t address this, and we’ve never had it come up, I will offer my personal opinion. I would only allow the Com Chinese to move within the confines of Com China, Nat China, Japanese controlled China, and Hong Kong. Remember, they were not friends with the French or the Brits. Hong Kong could be considered a special case perhaps. I will pose this to the group and get an official ruling

@General-6-Stars Yea exactly. Is in there. As far as a rule-booklet that someone mentioned, that should be in a file further down.