@304thmountaineercorp Just a friendly reminder that all of the Global War games are copyrighted and HBG insists that all expansions to the games be approved by them.
Posts made by GeneralHandGrenade
-
RE: I'm Working On An Expanded G2025
-
RE: Italy war declaration
If you read the top of page 11 you will see there is a new rule for V3 where you cannot combat move through a canal as you proposed. The example they give is exactly what you were talking about. You can still choose to do it the old way but either way that is one of the things you should have all of the players to agree to before the game begins. We always play it the new way.
-
RE: Shouldnt the CCP be named, "PRC" ("People's Republic of China") ??
@all-encompassing-goose
No.
The CCP was established in 1921. The PRC wasn’t established until 1949. This game takes place before 1949. -
RE: Surrounded City
@donham
You’re correct in assuming that the scrambling happens at the end of the Combat Movement Phase (8.6). Given that fact the planes would have already moved before the rolling begins and thus the bombing of the airbase would have no effect on the scrambling ability. We have always played it that way as you have DonHam.As a sneak preview, in V4 of the game the Strategic Bombing aspect of the game will take on greater significance. This is one rule which will be adjusted so that the defenders will not scramble until the attacker has announced that combat will begin in that particular territory or sea zone. That means that the attacker will be able to disable an airbase adjacent to another place where they will attack afterwards, giving the defender no chance to scramble planes from that airbase. That will make the game more interesting and combat more thoughtful. I look forward to seeing that and all the other changes in the next version of the game.
-
RE: Victory Points for Captured Objective Cities
I sincerely hope that nobody loses a game because the points were calculated wrong. If you guys had checked the Errata that was posted at virtually the same time as I had made my post on this thread, you would know that I had taken the time (as I always do) to talk to the game’s lead designer to make sure that I provide you with the correct interpretation of the rules.
I had a lengthy conversation with him last year to enquire as to why it wasn’t captured cities instead. He explained the reason being that the Russian Victory Points were easier to achieve and when they had play tested it like that the Comintern would win just about every time.
Knowing this I was skeptical that he had changed the rule since then. As I suspected, after calling him I found out that only the wording had changed but the rule was the same.
I may have made the odd mistake once in a blue moon a long time ago when I guessed at the correct interpretations. Even though I was usually right there were a couple of occasions that I missed the mark. I never do that anymore. When I post here it is only to give correct interpretations that I have verified first. I hardly ever do so anymore because I have no desire to argue with any of you.
Please read the Errata on this rule before you calculate the points at the end of your games.
-
RE: Can a Nation Contribute Negative Victory Points to its Alliance?
A nation cannot go below 0 Victory Points.
-
RE: Victory Points for Captured Objective Cities
The rule has not changed. Only the wording has changed for this rule. At the end of the game you count up all of the Victory Cities your Alliance has in their possession, not just the ones they’ve captured.
-
RE: Tought on diplomacy france, GB, poland and Germany
@chris_henry The minor powers that are listed in the tables that I referenced are aligned in a variety of different ways and that’s why they are in a separate section titled Special Alignment Conditions. It’s not enough to assume that all nations are treated the same, players need to read all of the rules to understand how to play the game. Rule 4.8 explains this in a single paragraph and there’s no need to explain with each one of them that they don’t follow the regular alignment rules.
-
RE: Tought on diplomacy france, GB, poland and Germany
@chris_henry It does say that. It says that Britain can align Poland if France is at war with Germany. There’s nothing ambiguous about that.
That’s no different than Germany aligning Austria without being at war with a major power.
-
RE: Tought on diplomacy france, GB, poland and Germany
@chris_henry There are a number of special alignment conditions (including Poland) that are outside the normal rules. You will find them on tables 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6 on pages 22 and 23.
-
RE: Chinese bug(not Covid)
@captainnapalm If the conditions have been met then the FEC would have to make an attack on the CCP to align the Warlords to the KMT. In this case the rules state an attack must be made and not simply a declaration of war.
-
RE: The FAQ Thread
@insanehoshi No.
Read 1.17 on page 11. What you’re suggesting doesn’t satisfy the conditions for the road to be open.
-
RE: USSR Declaration of War V3
@chris_henry You have to determine what’s right for the game you’re playing. How is Germany doing? What’s gong on in China? How much money do you have saved? How aggressive is the German player historically?
I try like hell to make sure I declare war first because I believe it’s a huge advantage to both sides. If your sleeping bear rolls have been really bad and Germany is stacked up on the border already then you’re in a tough situation. If he’s pre-occupied with the Western Front or something else then you may have some extra time. The key is to strike first no matter what though.
-
RE: USSR Declaration of War V3
@elcosmicvikingo Yes they can. When you consider they have up to 5 IPP of Wartime bonus income it can become more attractive to the Russian player to declare war after they get past the 30 IPP income level. Rather than wait until the Germans attack with their powerful surprise strike and probably wipe out extra units with less attrition, for sure consider attacking earlier before the Germans are ready to do maximum damage to you. If you save a few bucks you will still get to build your ground units 1 IPP cheaper the next round.
-
RE: Terrain movement restrictions
In this case I believe the rules are written clearly.
“Units are subject to Mountain rules on the first round of combat when crossing a mountain border and on all combat rounds in a mountain zone.”
That statement is clearly referring to combat. Combat is about rolling dice.The following paragraph in each section is clearly labelled “Movement”. That statement refers to moving in the specific terrain type.
I mixed it up the first time that I read it too. When you see that the first statement is referring to combat though you realize that it has nothing to do with movement. I hope that helps.
-
RE: Chinese bug(not Covid)
There will be a FAQ out in the next couple of minutes.
First of all the FEC could not make a combat move through the Himalayas. After the Burma Road opens the road is only used for Lend Lease and non-combat movement.
As was mentioned earlier, the FEC is governed by the British diplomacy rules and as such could not declare war on anyone until they reach their Wartime Income level.
The Warlords are not minor powers. They are semi-autonomous regions of China which is part of the KMT. The only region that isn’t part of the KMT is the region controlled by the CCP. It is because of this that the Allies cannot attack a Warlord territory. Only the Comintern and the Axis can attack a Warlord territory. A Warlord would only side with the Comintern if the KMT attacked them.
Thanks for pointing out that we omitted the connection between the Warlords and KMT, @CaptainNapalm. -
RE: The Alignment/Control of Finland
@insanehoshi Yes. You don’t declare war on the Axis, you declare on individual nations. Think of the Dutch situation before war is declared between Germany and Britain if Japan attacks the Dutch while at peace with the Commonwealth. The rest of the Dutch that Japan hasn’t attacked remain a controlled minor until Japan and the Commonwealth go to war or if Germany and the Dutch go to war while a state of war exists between Germany and the Commonwealth… It’s no different with the other minor powers. Two nations, regardless of whether they are minor or major, don’t align until they are at war with the same major power. Since Mongolia aligns to Germany, they remain controlled until they are both at war with Russia in the example provided. Don’t forget to do the recruitment roll.
-
RE: The Alignment/Control of Finland
@chris_henry Table 4.3 on page 22 clearly states who gets controlled and aligned by whom. I don’t know of anything in the rules and reference sheets that contradicts that table in regards to Mongolia.
-
RE: The Alignment/Control of Finland
Finland would be CONTROLLED by Germany until a state of war exists between Germany and Russia. When war is declared between them Finland would ALIGN with Germany. Other than Siam, none of the other minor powers would align to Japan under any circumstances. This is why I never play with the Diplomacy Expansion. Only in an alternate universe would a Scandinavian nation have ever aligned with Japan. Not only would they never do it, the Germans would never have allowed it.
-
RE: Fortification without unit defending
@didier_de_dax The correct answer is B. If the 2 first strikes doesn’t eliminate the attacking land units then the attacker captures the territory.