Two v3 rules questions

@GeneralHandGrenade Thanks GHG, good to know! I’m in no rush for them to be done, was just curious if they’d been on HBG’s radar to update the existing ones, since they would need it to reflect changes. Not surprising this would wait until after V3’s realease!

Hey all! So, this might be a question for those who have played some games with the V3 rules a few times, and/or those who helped play test or help refine (like GHG). I’m just wondering what changes between the two versions of the game people are bummed about that were taken out of V2, or just altered a lot. I don’t have any experience with V3 yet, other than reading the beta rules on their website once or twice. Would love to get others’ takes on what they might miss or not agree with. Just thinking ahead to the potential of house ruling a bit to revert to V2 if anyone wanted. A couple potential talking points (and sorry, it’s been a minute since I read through the V3 beta rules, so I might be misremembering): Variations in unit costs by nation? I think I read that all units of the same type will now cost the same for every nation, right? Does everyone like this rule? My gut reaction is I kind of liked having a little variable there, as it gave different nations different advantages. But on the flip side, I understand from a level playing field perspective how making all the same makes sense. Not to mention it probably simplifies the rules a bit. Any opinions? Special units. I might be misremembering here, but I thought there were no longer special units, like Volkstrum, Black Shirts, etc. for some nations. How do people feel about that? Do they miss that variation a bit, or is it pointless? Naval options. I’ve mentioned this before, and have heard how others feel. But again, just curious on thoughts. Do people like all the different naval base and naval unit options now in V3? Or has anyone found it might bog the game down a bit at times? Just curious. Any missed opportunities for improvement that you think would have been beneficial? Thanks! Chris

@HMS-Serapis Ahhhh there’s our mix up. I’m referring to the Version 2 rules. I don’t plan on playing with Version 3 until they are completed and there’s a full rule set and not a beta draft available! So I hadn’t looked too closely at those. So yeah, I’m talking about the current Version 2 rules still. But, it sounds like with what Version 3 is going off of, that the rule should probably be that things cannot begin to be researched even until July 1939, in answer to my question. That would be quite the deviation from the Version 2 rules if that were not the case.

Huh, I have no idea how that was missed before! I think I must have just seen capture and always stopped there. I’ll see if I can delete this post!

In my opinion: The spirit of that event is to decrease Britain’s and France’s Peacetime income, delaying their entry into the war. If they are already at war I don’t think the SCW would “decrease democracies’ appetite for war.” If it were me I would leave the UK and French income alone, and decrease the US income by 1. Hope this helps.

Ahhh thanks for this GHG. I’d always thought the rule meant that the Spanish Civil War kept playing out once the Germans and USSR were at war, but that once the war ended, the winning side would be automatically aligned. Interesting, that definitely changes things in my thinking of the game! It probably behooves the Axis to keep the war going for as long as possible to have them automatically join later. Though the flip side is no victory points for winning the SCW. Thanks for clarifying there!

Ok thank you for that information Eddie

@JbuckBuddy The militia don’t move