Taking a look at a opening strategy for Japan.
Posts made by PainState
How to leverage biding for turn order
The Allies can leverage the Axis into bidding more than they want for turn order by every turn they trade (USA/UK/RUS) 5 OSR for 2 OIL from Venenzuela or Suadi Arabia.
Thus the Allies every turn get 2 oil which they use to bid for turn order, they do it every turn no matter what, that will force the AXIS players to bid at least 3 oil every turn if they want to dictate turn order.
Do not overlook the power of bidding and how it effects the orders and production. The Allies need to leverage their universal access to oil over the Axis, who have no access to oil at the start of the game.
RE: cross pollination
My group did play one game of Global using the A&A 1914 contested territory concept and it did change up the game dramatically. The biggest change was the concept of you just push all in with everything you have and you either win/lose.
Way back in the day we use to play A&A with the blind set up. Two tables, axis on one side and allies the other. There would be a ref or moderator to run the game. Neither side knew what the other side was building or how they where moving. There were rules for recon missions and so forth. It did change up the game big time with the fog of war dynamic of playing blind.
RE: cross pollination
Axis and Allies G40 is a game unto itself.
War Room is a game unto itself.
I understand the compulsion to cross pollinate the games because the main core of players who have War Room are fans of Larry and his A&A line of games.
I think the games have different motivations and mechanics that make them stand on their own. Now that is just MO. You do what you want when it comes to house rules.
The one thing that I caution against is that War Room is a new experience for all of us. No need to knee jerk react to certain aspects of War Room and say Game X does it better so I will house rule Game X’s “view” into War Room.
I think World in Flames variable ending to turns, where you have no idea when a turn will end is superior to every WWII game that I have played. Yet, I feel that is a unique feature to WiF and feel there is no need to import that aspect into lets say G40 or War Room.
For people to understand one of the unique aspects of War Room, that you can only move 9 commands. Import that into AA G40 and see how much it changes the game. Because if you import the G40 idea that on your turn you can move every unit on the board if you so desire will totally destroy War Room as a game.
One negative of G40 and War Room is that Larry never put a finite end to these “games”. Thus that ensures the Allies will always win in less the Axis go hog wild early in the game. Thus the Axis never have to actually think ahead and play a defensive game. Games like WiF, SPI ETO, and Third Reich have a finite end to the war. If the Allies have not won and the Axis have not won by Sept of 1945 the “game” ends in a draw. Larry is obviously not a fan of a draw in his games, :}
Imagine if G40 or War Room had a finite end to the game. If the Allies have not won by the end of Turn #18 the game is a draw.
RE: One turn delay is messing with us
One way to get around the 1 turn delay in production is not be conservative on where you build your units. Germany and Russia have factories right on the front line. They can produce there and take the risk but the reward is those units appear right on the front line.
It is a give and take. The big downside of this tactic is not only can they be strat bombed into kibble bits BUT your enemy can capture them and use them against you.
You can also build right behind the front line in multiple locations in Germany and Russia. Not as much risk but good for building up a secondary/reserve force able to jump right into the action with out having to waste commands to move them. Once again some risk involved but a solution to this issue on the German/Russian front.