New to the game - Basic Questions

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Ok, it must be because of the rules affecting the country itself, I see...

I had the impression it could be any because I had seen examples of other countries aligned this way, Irak or Persia, and Turkey... I believe always on the side of Axis.

Thanks

You can check RAW for this. Chapter 19 states which countries can be aligned and when.

[Joseignacio]

Sure I will do, politics has always been my weak side, as far as we do the usual things I know by custome, when we try to do something different I start to shiver. I'll take a read.

[Joseignacio]

Can a ship load a unit, go to another port, unload it and load another one and leave provided it has enough moves^? The matter being the ship has already been used for transport of one corps already.

[Centuur]

No.

RAW:

Debarking in port
If a TRS ends its move in a port, any cargo debarks automatically at
the end of its naval movement.

Cargo can only debark at the end of the movement of the TRS.

[Joseignacio]

Than we have a bug, althoug I dont think we have a save by now.

[paulderynck]

I suppose it should work for two Divs. Start with one and then move to another port (using 2 range), embark the second, and then move out. The TRS would have to have at least 3 range.

[rkr1958]

I generally play at zoom level 4. But apparently there's a wealth of info at the higher levels. I've owned this game since Feb 2014 (7 years) and never noticed this before. I only noticed it now because I saw it in one of the screen caps in , "The Australian Axis Rebels versus the Swedish Allied Empire (5 player)" AAR."The Australian Axis Rebels versus the Swedish Allied Empire (5 player)" AAR

[rkr1958]

I thought I'd shake things up and try playing without pilots and carrier planes.

(1) What is the range of the implicit carrier air group?
(2) For this example (USS Yorktown), it appears that the implicit carrier air group has 2 tactical and 1 strategic factor. Is this correct?
(3) What are, or how do I access, the air-to-air & air-to-sea factors?

[Angeldust2]

The range of the three US carriers is 4. It is equal the air component factor in the lower left.
Attention: Japanese carriers only have range equal to air component x 2 !

Yes, tactical factors are 2 (4 divided by 2) and strategic factors are 1 (4 divided by 4).

AtA and AtS factors are equal to air component, so both are 4.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Angeldust2

The range of the three US carriers is 4. It is equal the air component factor in the lower left.
Attention: Japanese carriers only have range equal to air component x 2 !

Yes, tactical factors are 2 (4 divided by 2) and strategic factors are 1 (4 divided by 4).

AtA and AtS factors are equal to air component, so both are 4.

Thanks!

[Orm]

Be aware that the carriers automatically increase strength several times during a game if you do not play with CVP.

In 1942 and 1943, add 1 to the air component of every CV. In 1944 and later, add 2 to the air component of
every CV.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Orm

Be aware that the carriers automatically increase strength several times during a game if you do not play with CVP.

In 1942 and 1943, add 1 to the air component of every CV. In 1944 and later, add 2 to the air component of
every CV.

Thanks! Just curious, what folks experiences are playing without pilots and carrier planes (if any such folks exist that is).

[Angeldust2]

I have no real experience with the Global War game. I played Barbarossa and Guadalcanal fast start scenarios (= without CVP) in order to learn the UI and game mechanics. To upgrade from basic game (without CVP) to play with CVP optional was easy and effortless.

[ssiviour]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: Orm

Be aware that the carriers automatically increase strength several times during a game if you do not play with CVP.

In 1942 and 1943, add 1 to the air component of every CV. In 1944 and later, add 2 to the air component of
every CV.

Thanks! Just curious, what folks experiences are playing without pilots and carrier planes (if any such folks exist that is).

I have played a couple of games without CVP.

Particularly as the Axis I hated it. While yes, individually, it is great for Japan, I feel it makes CVs just way too powerful and unbalanced.

Needless to say, as the Allies I love it ....

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: ssiviour

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: Orm

Be aware that the carriers automatically increase strength several times during a game if you do not play with CVP.

In 1942 and 1943, add 1 to the air component of every CV. In 1944 and later, add 2 to the air component of
every CV.

Thanks! Just curious, what folks experiences are playing without pilots and carrier planes (if any such folks exist that is).

I have played a couple of games without CVP.

Particularly as the Axis I hated it. While yes, individually, it is great for Japan, I feel it makes CVs just way too powerful and unbalanced.

Needless to say, as the Allies I love it ....

I hate never to be able to fill all the RN CVs/CVPs with planes because they can't draw the correct size when they build. I'm also looking to decrease the power of land based air and increase the power of carrier air groups in the Pacific. Finally I'm looking for a way to decrease the effectiveness of CW strategic bombing in the early game. In my opinion, what a CW player can accomplish in early game playing with pilots in that regards would far exceed the wildest dreams of "Bomber" Harris. I'm hoping playing without pilots mutes that significantly and allows Germany not to have to build out their fighter force and deploy it France and Germany.

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

ORIGINAL: ssiviour

ORIGINAL: rkr1958


Thanks! Just curious, what folks experiences are playing without pilots and carrier planes (if any such folks exist that is).

I have played a couple of games without CVP.

Particularly as the Axis I hated it. While yes, individually, it is great for Japan, I feel it makes CVs just way too powerful and unbalanced.

Needless to say, as the Allies I love it ....

I hate never to be able to fill all the RN CVs/CVPs with planes because they can't draw the correct size when they build. I'm also looking to decrease the power of land based air and increase the power of carrier air groups in the Pacific. Finally I'm looking for a way to decrease the effectiveness of CW strategic bombing in the early game. In my opinion, what a CW player can accomplish in early game playing with pilots in that regards would far exceed the wildest dreams of "Bomber" Harris. I'm hoping playing without pilots mutes that significantly and allows Germany not to have to build out their fighter force and deploy it France and Germany.

There is a good solution to put planes unto the CW carriers. Don't scrap the zero cost CVP from the CW force pools.

And where strategic bombardment by the CW alone in the early game is concerned: if they are building bombers, they are not building enough convoy points, land units, FTR and HQ's to make sure places like Egypt, Malta and in the long run India and Australia stay CW controlled.
France is in need of a strong CW presence too. The defense of the USSR starts with a nice BEF in France (and Belgium, if possible). In addition to this, it's very good play to aid the French with a lot of CW controlled resources. The longer it takes for Germany to get to Paris, the better it is for the Allies. One or two turns delay, increases the chances of a Allied victory a lot...

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: Centuur
There is a good solution to put planes unto the CW carriers. Don't scrap the zero cost CVP from the CW force pools.

And where strategic bombardment by the CW alone in the early game is concerned: if they are building bombers, they are not building enough convoy points, land units, FTR and HQ's to make sure places like Egypt, Malta and in the long run India and Australia stay CW controlled.
France is in need of a strong CW presence too. The defense of the USSR starts with a nice BEF in France (and Belgium, if possible). In addition to this, it's very good play to aid the French with a lot of CW controlled resources. The longer it takes for Germany to get to Paris, the better it is for the Allies. One or two turns delay, increases the chances of a Allied victory a lot...

Thanks! All excellent points too.

[rkr1958]

Another question. This one concerning US entry action. The d10 for US reaction to a Japanese capture of a Chinese city is listed as 2 to 4. How specifically is that calculated?

[craigbear]

Any advice on when to collapse Vichy. In my solo game, Axis never got any traction in N. Africa, so almost all those territories have been lost. Basically, just Vichy itself is left. At what point should it be done with, after all, it still has a small navy and land/air forces to protect from south Med invasion.

[rkr1958]

ORIGINAL: craigbear

Any advice on when to collapse Vichy. In my solo game, Axis never got any traction in N. Africa, so almost all those territories have been lost. Basically, just Vichy itself is left. At what point should it be done with, after all, it still has a small navy and land/air forces to protect from south Med invasion.

So how many land units do you still have left in Vichy? Personally, if it's enough to garrison Nice, Marseilles and Toulouse and have ZOC lock on all coastal hexes in (Vichy) South of France then I wouldn't collapse it. I'd force the allies to invade and make Vichy hostile.