wouldn’t ships have to go around the peninsula though? Not so sure sea zone 1 and 2 are adjacent since their is a large strip of land between them.

can you move ships from sea zone 1 near alaska to sea zone 2. Is this a legal move or do you have to go around the so called peninsula? Thanks

In all our games Moscow has only been taken once. It is a tough nut to crack because it is so far away…we are finding that Russia is tough to take down…we have yet to even see Stalingrad fall.  How can the Italians help in Russia when their hands are tied in the Med…if you lose the Med quickly Italy is done and hence game over.

Mind you we have played alot of Europe and only a few global games so maybe things are a little different with global.

I should clarify that we allow tanks to blitz into enemy territories that are unoccupied during the non-combat movement phase.  We are testing it now…see what happens.

Our play group has added a new twist to tanks to make them a little more useful.  Tanks are now allowed to BLITZ into unoccupied territoies during the NONCOMBAT MOVEMENT PHASE…  As long as they did not move or attack during the combat phase.

We love what this new capability adds to the game. It allows the tanks to perform like they did in the actual war. It makes them even more dangerous if you dont keep an extra layer of defense. It allows them to get behind the front line and cause some real problems.  Now they are worth every penny of the 6IPC’s and we find it just adds another demension to the game.

We have a house rule where the allies can only produce minor industries in foreign soil.  I believe someone else has mentioned this as well.  We also don’t give the Russians the 2 free infantry every round when at war.  The game is much more balanced with these rules in place.  Without these rules there is no way the axis can win against a good player as the allies.

We are currently using the 12 sided dice from battle of the Bulge game.  Infantry, artilery, destroyers, subs hit on 5 or less.  This gives them a 40% chance of hitting which bumps it up from 6 sided dice.  This allows for slightly more hits so now your stack of 10 infantry will at the very least score a couple of hits.  This makes it more realistic while still adding in the random swings, just not as dramatic which we like.

Also tanks, fighters and cruisers hit at 7 so they are close to 60%. Bombers hit at 8, no % change.  But we feel that the 7 adds to the value of the more expensive tanks, more reason to buy them along with cruisers.  I like the 12 sided dice alot more because they are more consistent but still leave the luck out there so an infantry can still kill say 3 tanks…its still possible but not as much.

Just curious as to how many on here use the no luck dice.  We seem to think that some of the battles are almost too unlucky at times and large swings occur because of them.  I mean you can have 10 infantry on Egypt and miss all your rolls at 2 and get smoked with minimal losses to the enemy…really make or break the games.

We had one game where the British player missed on all his rolls in a crucial Naval battle at the biggining of the game and he never could recover in the atlantic.  A game changer and he kept getting terrible rolls all game…I know its part of the game but wondering if no luck might be the way to go.  There is still some luck involved with the no luck but not as much random swings.

Actually we are playing without the 2 free russian infantry per turn tight now.  We are finding it very tough for the axis to take moscow while still hoding Egypt, Rome and Paris.  The game seems more balanced without them to us so far.

This is what we are doing for our next game:
Bombers 15 ipc
Tac bombers  12ipc
Fighters stay at 10

I think this has to be done too balance the game out even better.  Otherwise, as the US player I would just keep bombing Egypt and the burma road all game long. Fighters need to stay at 10 in my opinion.  I think these changes will make a huge differnece.