Question to bombing raid.

Situation: GER attacked London with 2 Bombers and 2 Tactical Bombers. There are no british Fighters present.

The rulebook said: “If the territory offers more than one target, the bombers may be divided into groups, and each assigned a specific target […]” Europe Rulebook, 2nd, Page 17.

What is right, if i send 1 Tac to airfield, 1 Tac to harbour and 2 Bombers to the factory:

1.) Does the british roll 4 dices together and the attacker can choose the casualties.

or does it mean that

2.) The british rolls for each attacking group separately?

Merry Christmas from Germany

Situation:
Italians make an amphibious assault from SZ98 with 1 Destroyer, 1Cruiser and 2 Transport full with 3 Inf and 1 Art uploaded against Ägypt. There was an british Airbaise with 2 Fig and 1 Tac. The british decides to scramble. The Italians rolls 1 hit (the british Tac), the british rolls 2 hits (Destroyer and Cruiser).

Questions:
1. After this first attack round can the italians decide to withdraw only with the 2 transports?
2. If yes, are the landunits retreat on the transports too?

Let me make some statements to the discussion here:
First of all, the work of ozteas setup is great, because its accuracy historically and there are no more special rules. I like this, because so we can play it with the 2nd rules from the Global 1940 game at triple A. But historicall accuracy is not the one big point. It must be playable too! So the work of oztea is the first foundation for a great game (setup). Now we (the players) have to play and report our experience with this latest setup.
I think, the basis of a good discussions are much games, not the only one with the one strategy. Nobody of us has such much games in ozteas setup, that he can say “this doesnt work”. So let be carefull to change things all the time. People dont like this to much.
My own experience based on a playing group of 3 players and much Axis and Allies games at triple A. We have experience of all Axis and Allies variants and we loved specially the Global 1940 game. But i agree to Von LettowVorbeck, that the setup 1941 is very cool.
We played 3 games of 1941. Two of them are won by the Axis (1 europe victory / 1 pacific victory) and one Allies victory. This allies victory is the one, from which LettowVorbeck is spoken in the above discussion. The 7 trn by in US1 was a strategy of me as an answer to my experience as an axis player, as which i conquer moscow in round 5 (7 if you start counting round 3). The idea was to by 100% US 1 atlantic, in US2 50% and at US3 nothing in atlantic, respectively 100% full pacific to defend Hawai. The idea is, that defending is much cheaper than attacking. ANZAC only build ground troops and perhaps 1 or 2 fig. But it was only one big attack for the US in europe. There comes nothing behind that (perhaps a few inf, if you conquer an IC). But you cant see only the one side of the medal (map). You must see, what happens than in the pacific: the japanese conquer easy india in a few rounds (let me say J3, if you are doing well). Chinese must retreat too. Than the japanese can choose: Hawaii, Sydney or SanFranciso. Yeah, i mean San Francisco, because US has to defend booth VCs. Think the japanese player have a good stategic position after conquer india and shipping back with ships and perhaps a few troops to threaten the ANZAC and US (perhaps from the Caroline Islands).
Yeah, its possibly to by 7 trn in US1 and have a big threatening in Europe after US2, but this is for the moment i think. Let me work at an axis counter strategy and let us see in more games.
Our experience from the first games are, that the axis have a sligtly advantage, because they ever conquer India. So we are glad to see, that you oztea added the 3 chinese inf in sikang and remove 3 japanese inf in anhwe as the last changes. Thats the right way me and my friends think. Adding an airbase in normandy and a tac in algeria was the wrong way, because it fortify the axis. The navalbase in finnland wasn’t necessary too, because the germans didn’t must went their ships in SZ 115. Ah, the russian dd in SZ 5. Think, he isnt a problem. The japanese player only must move 1 dd more in SZ 26 instead 1 ss. But if you remove him, remove one japanese dd too (at a minimum).
But this are all only thoughts. Nothing goes about much game experience. So where are the players, who want play with me and my friends the 1941 setup at triple A?

Hi all,

played this setup two times. One win Axis / one win Allies. We will test it out more with the newest setup updated 27. November.

In the attachment for you myself edit Triple A Version for Ozteas 1941 Setup. I take the Second Edition Map (latest Version 3.5) and edit all pieces and income. Start of the game was the third turn, like Oztea say. So the political situation is correct. I took the Setup update from 27. November.

Best greetings!

Global 1941 Setup Second Edition Final.tsvg

Thank you Karl for this good Topic. My experience with Global Alpha+3 (40-50 games i think) (and now with the second Edition) is the follow (we assume, that 2 EQUAL Players fight each other):

The Axis has a slight advantage, because they can dictate the first 3 rounds at a minimum the strategic way. Till round 7 they will go forward and the only thing the allied can do is to look for counterattacks and keep they dangling. Round 7-10 are the critical rounds. If the allies can managed this time they will get a slightly IPC advantege. But not always (Kreuzfeld, youve right, my knowledge too).
@Kreuzfeld:

the problem is that when germany gets to rostov, ussr has to retreat to moscow, and ger gets 10 NO + middle east, possibly with japanese support. at this point, the axis often have acheaved an economical advantage on the allied. (while stratbombing moscow)

But the most important thing for an all in all slight (perhaps more than slight) advantage for the Axis are the Victory Cities. The Allies cant prevent all important land at the same time in the first 7 turns. You must land in Europe to force the Germans to build in western Germany (or Europe) AND you must hold Hawai, if Calcutta falls.
My fazit: Slight advantage for the Axis.

My last game (face to face, Global, second Edition, dice, original rules, with tech):
G3 attack on Russia, J2 attack, Ägypt didnt fall (but Italy didnt too in the game), Japan conquers Calcutta in round 7, after that US must spend 4 rounds full in pacific, defend Hawai with 2 Fighters left over (if he takes it, i cant reconquer), Japanese build all for pacific victory (US must reflight 4 Bombers from Europe to Pacific, 4 Trn too), but the russians and british walked to Calcutta for reconquering (which was succesfull in round 17). Last big battle around Hawai in round 18 to destroy the Navy (last hope): Japanese: 8 AC with 12 Fighters/4 Tacs, 2 Bombers, 5 Subs, 3 DD, 2 Cruiser, 3 BB, 3 Trn with 3 Inf/3 Pz VS US/Anzac: 6 AC with 12 Fighters, 6 Subs, 4 DD, 3 Cruiser, 1 BB, 4 Trn (they load of 4 Inf / 4 AA Gun in the turn before). The Japanese wins the battle with 2 Bombers, 1 Tac, 1 Fighter (destroyed BB, because they will killed in next turn from the US Navy from SZ 10, and the planes can land in Midway). Land Battle Hawai: US hold with 4 Fighters. The Axis surrenders! Playing time: 23 hours (2 Days).

I find a little changing in the second Edition:

Page 39 Pacific Rulebook 2ed:
“If the Soviet Union attacks Korea or any Japan-controlled territory bordering these Mongolian territories while Mongolia is still a strict neutral, Mongolia will remain neutral and not ally itself with the Soviet Union.”

So attacking Korea with Soviet Union breaks in second Edition now the Soviet-Japanese Non-agression-Pact. Thats a difference to the first Edition. Its a decision from the developer to strength the Axis (here Japan).

Any comments?! New tactics now? Lower risk for Japan, that the russians attack Manchuria or Korea?

Some questions:

1. SBR. Did the strategic bombers attack with d12 or d6? We think we added +2 like in the alpha+3.9 rules of global?!
2. Strait of Danemark: Can you pass it, while Danemark is still neutral? Or must you capture it with the Germans, to pass it in the next turn?
3. The tech development from a great nation works only for them or also for the minor states? Example: German tech dont work for Romania, Ungary etc.?! British tech works for Canada, South Africa and FEC? Can the minors spend IPC for the tech development?
4. Whats the ideas of the two poland rules? The first one (poland is still poland) is much different than the other, where poland units change to british. Because now the income gets to London and british units may can attack!
5. Can the communist chinese attack japanese Units and territories? And can they (Communist and Nationalist China) attack the yellow japanese territories in Asia mainland?
6. Whats the rules for AA Guns? One dice for every plane or only a maximum of 3 dice per every AA Gun (Alpha+3.9)?
7. Whats the definition of “Great Britain”? The lands: London, Liverpool and Scotland?
8. Did you revised the map? On my map there are in cairo and Oslo Navalbases. But in your last version (4.1) there arent some in the setup in this states.
9. Can the chinese fighter (american flying tigers) attack the japanese, also the burma road is captured?
10. Did the tech works in addition to the specifics of the nations? Example: The US transports and Destroyer cost at war -1 IPC. If the US developed improved shipyards, does Trn and DD cost now -2 IPC, while US is at war?

We find our game was a little bit unbalanced, because the Axis gets 9 VC in their third turn. They capture 10 in the fourth turn and will capture the last two in their next turns. The Axis win the war trough surrender of the allies. We like the map, the units specifics and special the tech chart. We painted about 150 units by ourself and it looks great.

Wow, thanks for the fast update! Yesterday, i have enough time to check all of your charts.
I find this two points for the accuracy:

1. Your wrote on the NO Chart for the Russians NO: “3 IPC for EACH original AXIS or pro-Axis neutral territory under Soviet control.”
I think, that someone can understand this incorrect and collect perhaps this NO, if for example Russia occupies Korea from Japan.
This was the original text from Larry Harris: “3 IPCs for each original German, Italian, or pro-Axis neutral territory that the Soviet Union controls.”

2. Setup Chart UK: added: “France: 1 Tank, 1 Artillerie”

I the best sense, greetings!

One more little point:

The Germans get the 5 IPC NO, if they controls Volgograd, Leningrad and / or Moscow. But in your NO Chart, there stay: If the Axis…

Original:

“When Germany Is at War with the Soviet Union:
• 5 IPCs per territory if Germany controls Novgorod (Leningrad), Volgograd (Stalingrad), and/or Russia (Moscow). Theme: High strategic and propaganda value.”