Let me introduce you to Phoney War, a grand strategy WW2 game for 2-3 players. Phoney War consists of two games in one: Race to Berlin, the 3 player version, begins in 1939 and features a setup inspired by history. Phoney War: Prelude to War is our two player version, and begins sometime in the early 1930s. It plays out very differently from the three player game, and should appeal to the alternate history crowd, or those who just like two player games more.

Some features: Diceless combat resolve. Fog of War mechanic. East and West share a common enemy in Germany, but are nonetheless competitors - single player victory!

Please see my instagram to follow along with the development story of Phoney War, and read some primers on our original and intriguing game mechanics.

Let me introduce you to Phoney War, a grand strategy WW2 game for 2-3 players. Phoney War consists of two games in one: Race to Berlin, the 3 player version, begins in 1939 and features a setup inspired by history. Phoney War: Prelude to War is our two player version, and begins sometime in the early 1930s. It plays out very differently from the three player game, and should appeal to the alternate history crowd, or those who just like two player games more.

Some features: Diceless combat resolve. Fog of War mechanic. East and West share a common enemy in Germany, but are nonetheless competitors - single player victory!

Please see my instagram to follow along with the development story of Phoney War, and read some primers on our original and intriguing game mechanics.

@Zhukov44:

 You’re exposed to risk in 110/111 and in France. Â

this is a very important point. in fact, the odds that Germany will win all three battles should UK choose to scramble is only: 67%. (8.18.89.4/100)

Unacceptable risk imo. If the opening led to some obviously dead won position for Axis then maybe or if I was playing a vastly superior opponent and I needed a few breaks to win then perhaps as well.

As it stands, I wouldn’t dream of trying this approach against an equal opponent.

@Young:

Purchase New Units

1 Strategic Bomber
1 Fighter
1 Destroyer

Combat Movement

SZ#106 - 1 Submarine
SZ#110 - 2 Submarines, 1 Battleship, 2 Fighters, 2 T.Bombers, 1 S.Bomber
SZ#111 - 2 Submarines, 2 Fighters, 1 T.Bomber, 1 S.Bomber
France - 7 Infantry, 4 M.Infantry, 3 Artillery, 3 Tanks
Baltic States - 3 Infantry, 2 Tanks, 1 T.Bomber
Eastern Poland - 2 Infantry. 3 Tanks
Bessarabia - 2 Infantry, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter, 1 T.Bomber

The tank in Bessarabia is unnessessary to achieving the desired result, and is simply a juicy target for Russia. Better to leave it out.

Why buy the bomber and fighter? Why not tanks and guys?

@Xandax:

My main issue with OOB is the inability to hinder the US income in most any plausible scenario which becomes a factor when USA enters the war.
Giving any significant bid to the Axis would tip the scales too quickly in the early game, and allow them to rush Russia (for example) too fast.

I suppose that is the real crux of the matter. Perhaps a cash bonus for Germany if they take out London or Moscow (keeping a G1 Russia attack on the table) would work instead of a straight up pregame bid.

Perhaps if USA loses its “at war” 30 IPC NO would work.

i know 3.9 official.

i am using some software that does not support the new rules. would like some input from the community on bids, not suggestions for doing something else.

@Uncrustable:

you could figure out the total difference (in IPCs) in OOB and alpha 3.9

divvy up that amount to the allied nations

though you may have to add a few to achieve a closer balance due to the fact that some balance changes were indirect (scramble for one)

that sounds a bit complicated. people were satisfied with a bid somewhere between 5 and 10 to allies or so in Anniversary edition, and without having to compare Anniversary to some other mod of the game.

I’d like to play a fairly decent game of Global with OOB rules and setup. I’d like to solve the heavy Allied prejudice with a cash only pregame bid to Axis.

Opinions on what would make it roughly fair?

Thanks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivY3jFXoXSY&feature=channel_video_title

Playable in 720 and 1080 hd (recommended for good connections/computers)

This video was mostly an experiment. It is largely unfinished, and is far from a complete introduction to the game - mostly a few random thoughts, and some experiments with presentation. No, i will not be doing anymore work on it or making changes. I may make more videos in the future based on what I learned making this one.

Enjoy!

this is an absurd question. what you are proposing is

should axis and allies not be axis and allies anymore.

having to coordinate the forces of different nations on different turns is the whole point of A&A its what makes A&A, A&A. to suggest doing away with it, which may very well make a better game, or a very good game in its own right, is to suggest baseball become cricket.

@Larry:

12. Transports are not allowed to end their movement in a sea zone containing any enemy subs unless at least one friendly warship is also present in the sea zone at the end of the movement phase. An unescorted transport could still move unescorted through a sea zone with enemy subs, but could not end its movement in such a sea zone. (12/06/10)

So, a sub is now capable of defending a coastline against undefended transports landing troops. However, a sub does not prevent unescorted transports from loading troops. Correct? And if so, is this not rather inconsistent?