Harris Game Design Forums

I don't know if some of the national objectives give IPCs every turn or one time only. Some are obvious, like the American ones say "increases income"(continuous) "each round" and "each turn"(continuous). Same with the Chinese one. Anzac has one which clearly says "one time". However that leave two ...

I think he was vague enough that it doesn't matter.

To combat the dedication of funds to one front weirdness, it may be an idea to limit the amount able to be transferred per turn, such as "US can only take X(20ish?) amount of it's IPC's from the pacific side of the board and use them on the European side and vice versa". I think this is one of the c...

I'd appreciate if they stopped hijacking my thread about the official Europe 1940 with their ideas for fan made maps

Does Larry/any of the playtesters care to comment about the original topic of this thread?

Where are those previews?!
(It's got to be getting near time to send out the copy for publishing, a process that can take month(s) to publish and distribute for retailers to have on release date.)

I still think germany would collapse faster then Japan could reach juggernaught proportions that threaten all of the allies. I hope it's a scenario thats been play tested out, where tester actually did try completely dedicating US to Europe, while the pacific allies turtle with as many infantry as t...

I don't know the economies in global or the relative income advantages that will be associated with it. But if getting 12 VC's gives a significant economic buff to axis to equal out with allies then perhaps there is a chance. However it still almost completely comes down to germany being able to tak...

those seem acceptable too. As long as there is roughly two "rows" of see zones in the Med for there to be north/south fighting I'd think it would make for a good game.