Posts made by general jason

Or the flip side, Britain once it lands can reinforce Italy without ever entering the med. France can do it on any Italian front immediately. Broken and I’m glad they saw that before posting this optional rule.

Exactly, especially if you’re trying out Strategic Movement rules in the game. France can take Spain, and then immediately bring it’s troops to the front the next turn. Keep 4 IPCS that will never be contested for the remainder of the war? Why wouldn’t you do that?

I’d rather see further clarifications on certain territories that historically were aligned or owned by one of the alliances, like Greece, like Persia, just like Belgium, Albania, Bulgaria and Romania currently are, but still have stricter rules for invading the remaining True Neutrals. France takes Spain = Germany building a single transport and moving infantry over to claim Norway and Sweden for a free 8 IPCS and 16 additional units. It would keep the countries that were traditional out of the war to remaining there like it does in G40.

@Flashman:

Modify US entry: Start @ turn 5.

Every time the CPs invade a neutral (non-aligned) moves US entry 1 turn sooner.

Every time the Allies invade a NAN moves US entry 1 turn later.

First RR or Fall of Moscow moves US entry 1 turn sooner:

That’s a great mechanic.

@Flashman:

The first time the RR is eligible to occur, consider this the first (February) revolution, bringing a Republican, but pro-Allied government to power (welcomed by Washington). The CPs may, but are not obliged to, sign a treaty with this government, or they may choose to fight on. They may decide to delay acceptance in order to gain control of more Russian tt before the armistice, or attempt to take Moscow.

The 2nd time the RR condition occurs (October - Bolshevik crew) the CPs get their last chance to sign a treaty.

If the CPs sign a treaty with the Republicans, the war ends for Russia and no 2nd Revolution (Communist takeover) occurs.

This gives the option of allowing the treaty to occur or not instead of it being automatic. Gives the CPs the power to choose depending on the situation of the war in each game. I like that better that playing with the optional rule or not: Make the rule automatic but the option is up to the Central Powers.

@Flashman:

In all cases, if the CPs either sign a treaty with Russia OR capture Moscow for the first time, they get a release of POWs of 1 infantry per full round played per power still at war with Russia.

Indeed this should be a general rule for countries that lose a capital; they must return POWs to all their active opponents @ 1 inf per power per completed round.

In the case of USA or (turn 2 entry) Italy the number must be calculated from their starting “at war” round.

That’s the best idea I’ve heard in a while, and not just for this version of the game but for any A&A game. I’d like to see the idea of POWs explored.

@Flashman:

Keep it historical; does anyone seriously think Switzerland or Sweden would have declared war if Turkey invaded Persia?

You’re right they wouldn’t. Same with 1940 as well, but I accept it as a game mechanic.

@Flashman:

You might as well just make them all impassable.

Sure, I don’t care what the mechanic is so long as there is one. No mechanic as it is right now seems odd to me that’s all.

Your right it was. Thanks for the heads up. I wish I got that in a pm from the mod who moved it but oh well. Strange how discussions of rail, the board itself, bids, reductions of navy or any other tweak to the game didn’t end up there as well.

I created a thread earlier asking about this but for the life of me I can no longer find it, so either I’m blind or someone deleted it without sending me a pm to explain why. Until they do I’ll keep recreating this thread.

Anyway, has there been any talk whatsoever about changing the True Neutrals in 1914 to their 1940 Global counterparts? Where once your alliance violates the neutrality of a True Neutral then ALL the other True Neutrals are now allied against your alliance? As it is right now it seems like a consequence-free no-brainer to invade True Neutrals which imho shouldn’t be. France takes Spain and Spanish Morocco. Germany takes Denmark, Holland and possibly Switzerland. The biggest change would be that the Ottomans and the UK could not attack each other through Persia. Any thoughts?

Has there been any talk regarding restoring the True Neutrals to their status enjoyed in the 1940 Global game? Meaning, your side attacks a true neutral then all true neutrals are now allied against your alliance? Stops Germany from taking Denmark, Holland and possibly Switzerland, but stops France from taking Spain, Spanish Morocco, and it means neither the Ottomans nor the UK can pass through Persia (and the UK could only do it via transports). I’m just finding that in the 1914 game attacking True Neutrals in a no-brainer and there should be some consequence imho. Thoughts?

I just stole all the white chips from the original A&A game as we had a couple of copies kicking around. I use the whites for the Allies and the greys from all the newer versions for the Axis. Makes it way easier to tell Russia and Italy apart.

@xxstefanx:

I do not know where you get your knowledge from, but I extensively researched Industrial Production for creating my WWI game using the university library in Hamburg.

I bet you did. I’m not talking about industrial output for civilian goods but America’s capacity to make war at the time, which is where I find the 20 IPCs for them in this game fair.

@xxstefanx:

USA was the No1 economy in terms of production already. The outcome of WWI just multiplied the margin. UK was ruined financially and USA hadn’t invested much before the war was over already.

Not arguing that the US had recently taken the lead for lending over the UK. Like I said the colonies eventually became unprofitable. I completely agree that WWI only exasperated this shift in power. Nor I’m I arguing production levels at the time, but what they were producing at the time of that war.

@xxstefanx:

As noone in their right mind would ever declare USW due to the ridiculously low damage chance and potential of the subs it does not matter anyway, but you are right: Rules must be consisten!

I completely agree.

@Siris101:

If you attack any of the beige neutrals like Norway, Denmark, Spain, then they get the opposite alliance to mobilize troops.

If you attack Spain with France then you pick which Central Power nation to represent the mobilized troops.

you mobilize x2 the IPC value (all infantry and 1 artillery). So Germany gets 7 infantry and 1 artillery to use against the attackers.

You have been playing wrong, and this may have been why the Central powers were winning so easy.

@Suvorov:

I didn’t see him saying anything like that.  He just said that he assumed that attacking one true neutral didn’t make ALL true neutrals hostile, like in AA1940.  He’s right on that point.  Based on what he’s said about attacking neutrals I infer that he’s having them defend.

Yes that is exactly what I meant. Thank you. We did mobilize x2 IPC value.

@Suvorov:

He has some good points, too.  Battleships are cheaper, and that is a good option for the CPs.  I also see that he took a different approach on attacking neutrals than we did in our games, and maybe that makes sense, too - in most cases the neutral forces will be wiped out so the CPs can pick up extra IPCs fast.  It’s better than trying to get the IPCs for Belgium, for example.

With the cheap neutrals like Holland and Denmark that can’t be reinforced or liberated 4 easy points per turn is worth the 1-turn stall vs. France. With the CP fleets, I was trying to break the mold of WWII where Germany always loses their fleet. In this game they don’t have to. And yeah it seemed early on like the only viable strategy to keep the Allied Fleet that comes later out off the coast of Kiel and out of the North Sea. Same with Austria. Kill the mobility.

@Suvorov:

There is also a very good point about the Russian Revolution.  The US isn’t a powerhouse like in WWII A&A games.  Knocking out Russia will probably leave the CPs in a much better position, IPC-wise, than the Allies.  Germany is likely to have an additional 15 IPCs or so, Austria might be up by 6, and the Ottomans could be up by 5 or so.  In that sort of situation, the CPs are in a good position to first shore up their line with lots of infantry and then start spending on other things.

That’s the plan. Whether it works on a regular basis is a whole different story. :wink: The game’s been fun so far and I’m playing my first 6-man game in about 2 hours.

@xxstefanx:

In my opinion USA should have 40 IPCs production capacity
(it already was world’s No1 economy!)
BUT lbesides haviing the 3rd largest fleet in the world land forces were virtually nonexistent! The 6Inf/2Art are ridiculously exaggerated!

1. USA 40 IPCs (as above)
2. No production Rounds 1 to 3/as long as not at war.
Easy fix.

America wasn’t the world power in 1914. 20 IPCS for their production at that time is accurate imho as this is their war production - not their capacity to loan money. They became the world power as a result of WWI as they replaced the UK as the world’s principle money lender. WWI broke the British Empire. Also their colonies started to fail. The Austrian-Hungarian Empire was the 2nd largest territory in Europe, and at the time had the 4th largest production of goods in the world, but their armies sucked. The IPCs should always reflect their capacity for war production. The Americans were not known in WWI for their armies which is precisely why the Germans underestimated them in WWII.

No American production during rounds 1-3 ignores the possibility of German unrestricted submarine warfare prior to round 4 which would bring the US into the war earlier. Both times we played the game we left the American fleet in their own sea zone. We must have skimmed over that portion of the rulebook under American Isolationism, but after reading it again I guarantee we’ll still play that way as none of the guys I play with ever try to ‘game’ anything. Nothing in the rulebook that forces the American player to leave their home waters and it’s the correct way to play it imho.

I’ve played 2 games of this testing it out with a couple of buddies and both times the Central Powers have trounced the Allies. As we are still learning the game, strats and rules I think it would be premature to glean anything from it. I’ll be playing my first 6-man game this Friday, but as it’ll be a bunch of noobs to the game (not to A&A in general but this one) it’ll be another learning game as well. For all I know I could be still playing some stuff wrong as the WWII versions are so ingrained in my head, anniversary and global anyway.

If I’m playing neutrals correctly, meaning attacking true neutrals doesn’t mobilize all the others against you like in 1940, in my first two games Germany has gone after whatever cheap territories they can scoop up in Africa, attacked neutral Denmark, Holland, Switzerland and Belgium first turn, and consolidated their fleet into sea zone 9 while wiping out the British fleet there. If all goes well they are earning around 40 IPCS. They’ll contest Belgium and Switzerland forever once France gets in there, but Holland and Denmark will earn them points all game provided they hold sea zone 10. Turn 2 they retreat their fleet back to Sea Zone 10 and add a battleship.

Austrians add a battleship immediately and never leave sea zone 18. From here they can hit Tuscany with their transport as well as Venice. They attack Serbia, Albany and Venice first turn and consolidate everything they have left into Galicia and look to the Ukraine. Both Germany and Austria keep adding fleet as they can. Battleships are so cheap in this game that it’s been working (so far), but again too premature to tell.

Those free hits for Battleships have been crucial to holding onto the CP fleets. So far I’ve found that by the time the British Indian fleet can get to the Italian sea zone Austria will have 3 more units there, preferably Battleships if they can do it. As Allies can only defend together but not attack, it requires the French, then the British, and then the Italians to suicide their Fleets there to remove it. Only the French can place in sea zone 16, and that’s only if they can afford it - India cannot build navy to replace it and Italy just won’t.

I agree with others that if the Central Powers lose their fleets forever, as well as sea zones 10 and 18 they are lost imho as it’s too easy for the Allies to mobilize against them. If they can hold the British to just reinforcing Picardy that’s huge. By the time the Americans get into the game Italy and Russia have been having severe problems. And with America only earning 20 IPCS and starting with virtually nothing I haven’t found them to be the threat they are in the WWII versions.

Both games the Ottomans have been screwed - no fleet off the bat and even a trickle effort from the Brits in India gives them major manpower problems. But with them I’ve pushed into Greece and walked into Bulgaria first turn, whilst contesting Trans-Jordan and Mesopotamia after they are invaded.

Again my first experiences with the game so take with a grain of salt. If after many games players are still finding that the Central Powers are losing too often then maybe consider a bid, but seeing as the game is barely a week old with a completely different play style with new rules on old units I’d like to see more playing before those conclusions are drawn.

2 cents
Gj.

I don’t think anybody is arguing that AA40G isn’t epic. I agree if people want to play games that are guaranteed to be shorter they should stay away from AA in general. I think people are wondering whether there is any solutions to bring the Round Time faster so the game progresses further before ending it. I think most people here are committed to the 12-hour game, but would rather see the game into Round 12 by then and finished rather than Round 6 and having to call it.

2 cents.

Yeah we played yesterday - 4 out of 6 players new to the Pacific rules let alone the Europe and Global rules. 6 rounds in 12 hours. This game will always be long unless of course stupid play or stupid dice decide it earlier. Improvements for 1-day of gaming with decisve victory as opposed to calling it:

1. experienced players.
2. powers purchase their units prior to their turn.
3. chess clocks.

With the guys I game with we only seem to play a full-on 6-player global game probably 4 times a year (stat holidays) so we treat it like a ‘fishing trip’ - up and ready to go really early, and prepared to play for 12 hours if need be. Lots of Band of Brothers and loads of beer. We started at 8AM yesterday, but for next time I’m going to propose 7AM.

Again without dumb luck and/or play the game is epic, but if you give every ‘major’ power only 10 minutes to complete a turn or less you should be able to get out before dinner provided you start early.  :wink:

One of my buddies tried this strat yesterday with the US - took Norway on turn 4 with 12 units there: something like 6 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 4 Tanks. Turn 5 the US built a complex in Norway and landed their 2 planes from a carrier there. Turn 6 the Germans moved 7 units from Finland: 6 Infantry, 1 Artillery, plus a transport that had 1 Infantry and a Tank, plus 6 German Planes (1 Strategic, 2 Tac, 3 Fighters), plus an Offshore Bomb from the Bismarck. The Axis took it with all their planes left plus 1 tank to land. Germans were supremely lucky to take it but it was karma for a foiled Sealion attempt that had decent odds of success earlier.

The UK, reluntant to take back Norway because they would own it and not the US, did nothing, but the Italians landed 2 planes there and the US failed to take it back. At this point, Japan had squashed China and their Russian land advances were as far in the North. Italy despite Taranto lost everything in Africa up to Libya to the Brits and French but surprisely held Egypt and Transjordan for the game, plus Syria and had a new factory in Iraq. Germany held Leningrad, Archangel, and the Russians in the North - center and South they were behind Smolensk.

6 rounds took 12 hours but 4/6 players were completely new to 1940 play, whether it be Europe, Pacific or Global so hopefully the next game is quicker.

It’s a great strat for the US, and I agree with IL that in this game it would have caused Germany plenty of problems - which was why we threw everything the Germans had left in the north to sacking it……but it easily could have went the other way.

After 12 hours we called it an Axis victory. Combined Axis earnings at the end of Round 6 including National objectives was 170 something vs. the Allies 150 something. Despite Taranto, despite Sealion foiled, the Axis did a lot better than I originally anticipated after Turn 4 and the ‘super-economy’ kicked in. Once this did and Japan jumped into the full war and started attacking islands, the UK and everything else they got up 71 IPCS all on their own - had their entire fleet still despite 3 Destroyers going down, and with 20 planes parked in Japan their fleet was free to mobilize.

One full game complete and the game looks a lot more balanced then we originally anticipated. Say what you want about Japan, in the limited experience we have in this new global game I think they need to be godzilla still in order to bring the US to bear - 82+ IPCS vs. Europe-only needs to be deterred.

Great game, best global AA game so far, but it definitely needs a chess clock for player turns as I do not see this game ever not being a full day affair for completion.

Those look great.

We just took old industrial complexes from all the old versions of AA that we had and painted about half of them red. We chose red because it uses the same logic as the chips and it stands out as well.

@SgtBlitz:

01. I’m assuming you built your 4 transports (w/o protection) in SZ 113?  Hmm, I always thought that the UK could reach the transports with 2 FIGs if they landed on the carrier moved to SZ 110 (They get to move 5 spaces with an airbase).

02. Also, why didn’t the UK player try to block you in SZ 112 with any naval leftovers?  If you’re only building transports G1 there’s at most the BB, CA, and possibly a sub.  Some ships/aircraft could of/should of been in range to annihilate that stack.

03. I’m guessing the UK player was new or wasn’t familiar with the new airbase/naval base rules.

At least the UK player built infantry!  Imagine if he hadn’t of done that right away!

01. With the exception of the carrier in 112 and Canada the entire British Navy was destroyed in G1. I built 4 transports w/o protection but I assure you they were out of range.

02. He had no naval leftovers other than what I’ve already stated. And yes he did destroy the remaining German fleet minus the transports and subs, again already stated.

03. We are all new to this version of the game.

@miamibeach:

Could the DD from Gibraltar have sailed to 112 to block the German invasion?

Again - already dead in G1.

@miamibeach:

general jason…why did your UK player decide not to attack the German fleet? with the CV, DD, TAC from Gibraltar, and the 3FTR’s in UK?  How did Germany destroy the two CA’s in 112?..ie…did the German fleet come into 112?  If not, then why did the UK player not block 112 with the DD from Gibraltar?

The entire British fleet save Zone 112 and New Brunswick was destroyed G1. There was no destroyer because I made a suicide attack against 112 with 2 subs in G1 in an effort to disable the carrier from launching. UKE1 saw the Bismark and the cruiser go down off the coast of Denmark with the carrier from 112 moving up to attack thus saving the Italian fleet.  The German transports were still in the North sea and out of range of planes. The British Carrier went down G2. Sea Lion took place G3.

Hindsight, if Sea Lion was to be attempted again I’d go for a Carrier and build in near the Atlantic side of Denmark where my Battleship and Cruiser would be after G1. Unfortunately with the Brits being completely unable to kill this fleet the remaining fleet in 112 would be left to cripple the Italians at Taranto after UKE1.

Played up until turn 4. Germany’s Sealion attempt has 5 INF, 5 ART, 1 Bomber, 3 TAC and 4 FGT vs. 11 UK INF, 1 French INF, 3 FGT and 1 SB. AA gun did nothing. First round dice rolls were par. Second and third rounds NONE of my German planes hit. NONE. Germany built 4 transports first round. By the end of turn 3 the Germans had no fleet other than a couple of Subs as a result of Sealion failing miserably when I TOTALLY should have taken it, but at this point it’s game over as the UK player had been building up his fleet in New Brunswick and the Americans were following suit.

Only positive affect of this was that the UK did not go for the Italian Fleet in UK1 and as a result the Italians were kicking butt, with their full fleet plus an additional transport. By the end of Turn 3 they had the all of North Africa, plus TJ, Syria, South France, Egypt, Bulgaria, Greece and Iraq and were collecting 36 with NO.

Meaningless though. In a game were the Axis start off with less money from the start and it takes so long for the Axis to catch taking territory - which takes so much longer in this game, I’m really looking forward to seeing my first post where somebody claims to have acheived Axis victory. Even if the Germans were successful with Sealion in this game (which they should have been - read above and do the math) it still doesn’t matter because despite the extra IPCS from taking Britian they have wasted so much money that should have gone towards beefing up the Babarossa offensive - and this was in a game where the Japanese declared war on Russia straight away and had units in Yukuts by turn 3.

1941 finally resolved the 3 on 2 flaw that all the other incarnations of AA had by bringing Italy into the game and making it a proper 3 vs. 3. 1940 has gone back on this and made it 6 vs. 3. France doesn’t really count of course, but despite the massive fleet and air power the Japs have they have WAY too much to do on the mainland and the Atlantic and the American NO just adds insult to injury.

We never played with NO in 1941 after a couple of games because we found that it favoured the Axis too much. Without favours the Allies but it was more balanced as a result because the Allied strats were harder to coordinate. We found it made for a better game despite Italy seriously struggling for income.

After a few more games of 1940 we might be coming to this same conclusion. America can never be taken - EVER, unless of course everybody else is out of the game, so the last thing they need is +30 IPCS per turn. Long term without the NO Normady will happen in 1944 - when it should have happened. So far in this game, and again I admit my experience in this one is as limited as everybody else is, I see the Normady campaign happening WAY earlier and there is absolutely nothing the Axis can do about it.

2 cents.

That’s actually perfect. Thanks man.  :-D