Six Reasons Why You Should Play Global War 1936

[@5stargeneral603]

I hope you get some kind of reward from HBG for your video. This is by far the best ad they could think of 🙂

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Wow! That's very kind!

[@keiths81ca]

The three side war better reflects the reality of the Second World War prior to Operation Barbarossa.

[@CaptainG9318]

Great video….You had me at hello.

[@phd_angel]

I’d love to play (in person or remotely). It’s hard enough to find players for Axis & Allies, let alone a more complex game like G36. I’d love to play it though.

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

It is an amazing game! Join us on Discord (I'm Global War '36 Enthusiast) and see if there are others near you!

[@phd_angel]

@@GW36_Enthusiast Thanks! I live in South Florida.

[@CobraWargaming]

Very well said, I havent played Global in about 2 years and I cant wait to get back at it with Version 4

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

You won't regret it, Cobra!

[@CaptainVasiliArkhipov]

Free technology is the most fun. Years back we used a dozen different units as technology developments on the Milton Bradley board, each player filled out their own 11 technology chart, #2 through 12 they put their favorite on the 7. Three free technologies per team..ie..1 each Allie and 3 for the 2 axis. Roll 2 dice and your personal chart shows the technology you just got. Also could buy the technology tokens, no tokens thrown away, just keep rolling until a 6 is rolled, then roll 2 dice and consult your chart. Adding new technologies as agreed upon. The technologies available are many, hoover tanks, landing craft, howitzers and machine guns. Lite and heavy armour. Several aircraft and smaller and bigger boats. Possibly turn sequence adjustments and the nuclear projects. Germany lacked resources for the rockets and jets, much compromising was done, it could be interesting to need these resources for victory...or defeat, sinking oil tankers and other strategic resources would be much more fun than bombing for dollars, although the atom bomb damage would be paid TO the attacker as an optional extra game ending nasty, we didn't get that far but did thoroughly enjoy at least a dozen games with all this free technology. The game changes are not too sudden, no automatic upgrades except long range, you didn't get to use long range during the combat phaze on the turn it was developed, it was often a rude sudden change.(drop tanks added), we tried $5 helicopters for several games. Attack 1, def 1, move 4 and take land. After Germany flew from France with 16 helicopters and took my USA capitol, we had to edit that unit..NOT take land and move 3 tamed it well. Naval $4 boats at 1,1, and move 1(two if on/in a transport).

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Wow! That sounds epic with the 16 German helicopters! 🤣

[@CaptainVasiliArkhipov]

@@GW36_Enthusiast yeah it was, my alley did liberate my capitol but I don't remember who won.

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

@@CaptainVasiliArkhipov And that right there is the expression of our love for the hobby! It didn't matter who won! But the 16 helicopters is a memory seared in!!!

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

A friend of mine who is near to me in age emailed, “You cannot say ‘My jam’ if you are over the age of 30. Otherwise, this is a great video.” But a teenager I know messaged me, “As someone under 30, I can assure you nobody under 30 says, ‘My jam.’” If I were exactly 30, I’d be in the clear! Perhaps I intentionally started my video with the words, “My jam” to make it crystal clear that I am a boardgaming geek. If I were cool, then what credence could you give me regarding a recommendation for a WW2 board game? But once you heard the words, “My jam…” you thought to yourselves, “Wow! This guy is a massive nerd. He must know what he’s talking about. I think I’ll listen to what he has to say!”😊

[@strykerhalo]

Sounds cool. Have to check it out later

[@flak88]

Great video! And a great appeal to new players, well done

[@ghr1990]

I wish I had people to play with.

[@Izadirad1995]

Does anyone know when this will be available again? Like does HBG get more around Christmas or something? its been sold out for a while and I sooo want to play. I just got into Axis and Allies again getting the global40 set. I use to play risk then I got the 1941 anniversary and played a few years ago. Now i want to upgrade!

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

This is for sure just about to be released. The rules for v4.1 are out. I have been sent an advance copy of the v4.1 map (search my channel for a video on it). I will ask Doug, the head of HBG, if he can give us a firm date!

[@waddlekatz1329]

how did you paint those planes

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Hey, Waddle! I wish I had the skillz to paint the aircraft you see! There are several people/websites where you can purchase custom painted pieces like I did. One is axisandalliesboardgaming (then end with c o m), and another is combatminiatures (then end with o r g). I also have custom pieces painted by Mike Macy (link in my description) and Randall 9449 (link also in description).

[@stevemorency1493]

Well done

[@Christopher4700]

do you recommend V4 or V3? The manuals for V3 is prettier lol, or maybe v4 map but v3 rules?

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

It is an excellent question! Without a doubt, I recommend v4. You have already seen how gorgeous the map is, so I don't need to persuade you there - and that's the one you purchase. The rules are free to download, so you don't have to pay. The v4 rules have some dramatic improvements: the strategic objectives offer multiple valid paths to victory (where v3 punishes Italy for getting in the war, makes it just too tempting for USA to focus solely on Japan, and makes it super hard for USSR to win due to v3 rules about losing VP's if you lose Home Country), improvements to technology like airborne doctrine, improved strategic rockets, and amphibious doctrine, a new v4 mechanic called "in port" (if you search my videos, you'll see one I made on how much this rule improves the game), and improved diplomatic pacts/consequences that give you a range of options (should I sign the Molotov-Ribbentrop? If I invade Finland, should I just stop at Viipuri, or try to go for Helsinki? Should I take over Bessarabia invoking the Soviet Sphere of Influence?). I've played both (and won a v3 tournament this summer), but I could never go back to v4!

[@Christopher4700]

@@GW36_Enthusiast Thanks for the elaborate answer. Does v4 still seemly work with the v3 expansions?

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

@@Christopher4700 Some of the expansions work seamlessly, but others don't. People are working on updating the most popular expansions for v4. You should join us on Discord! Search for "ABGB's Global War Games." I'll post a temporary link in the description.

[@Christopher4700]

@@GW36_Enthusiast cool I joined the discord thanks

[@tealino1]

Which size map do you have here shown in the video?

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

4 feet by 8 feet.

[@tealino1]

@@GW36_Enthusiast Thank you

[@HamboneHQ]

I do love playing with army men again!

[@jamiemerian9736]

Thanks for the review. How good is V3 compared to V4? I like the fact that version 3 has Antarctica spaces. Can V4 rules be used with a V3 map?

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

I really love v4. I feel the map is gorgeous! You could do some work arounds to shoe horn v4 rules on the v3 map, but there are a few problems. Romania has been divided in two and this important for the v4 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The territories in Russia have been changed in v4 to give Russia a better chance. The sea zones in the Mediterranean have been changed/expanded. You do lose out on the Antarctic, so if that is important to you, the v3 map has that.

[@r.l.jeffries1091]

Will this v.4 release be a complete/boxed game or will it be piecemeal, e.g., buy the map, download the rules, buy the player boards all separately? Need to have your own minis to use too, right? Sorry, the main website is not laid out very well and lacks clarity. Edit: Also, your acrylic pieces look awesome. Where did you get those? Like the circular nation tokens, and square map-looking pieces, and those awesome clear, tall, rectangular pieces?

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Excellent question! It is piecemeal and that makes it hard/expensive! On the other had, there is a perverse satisfaction in creating your own game! To learn more about my task force markers, look on my channel for a playlist regarding my "systems." You will find one about my task force markers (which is what I think you are referring to. These were a combination of items from HBG and Combat Miniatures.

[@r.l.jeffries1091]

@@GW36_Enthusiast thanks. Can't wait to get into this haha.

[@didelphidae5228]

Piecemeal is a boon because you can use all your old Axis & Allies minis for the game and save money, but also a barrier to entry as someone new is going to have to chock up a wad of cash just to get started with the basic GW36 game.

[@wartable]

Fun but too long and needs a 2-player variant

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

I hear you! BBR might be the game for you. It's only 8 turns instead of 18+, 2 sided instead of 3, and designed to be played in a day instead of a weekend. It's half the game of GW36! Both are great games!

[@wartable]

@@GW36_Enthusiast We play BBR and GW 1936 (amongst many other games) That's why I'm saying this need a similar treatment as an alternative..🤷‍♂️

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

@@wartable No, you need to change your perspective about how the game should be designed. First, think about how long you have to play the game. If you want to be able to play it in a day, then you make certain decisions and are required to cut a lot of complexity. BBR v6 is going to start in 1941, I believe. The decision to drop 1936-1941 is a necessary decision to met the goal of a one day game. GW1936 was designed to be played in a weekend, then playtested to achieve that goal. You can't then take all the complexity and length of a game designed to fill that "space" and try to crush it down to BBR size. Try this thought experiment. Imagine you reviewed BBR and explained how amazing it was. Then someone posted that they wanted it to be an equally amazing one player game you can finish in 2 hours. You would instantly say, "That's not happening."

[@wartable]

@@GW36_Enthusiast We (2) have no time limits and it is still too long. A weekend...a week...whatever it takes. It needs a 2-player variant b/c it is cool and fun but 1) impossible to get a group (3+) together to play for the time necessary therefore it is never played to conclusion (like Global 1940 was never finished) as a) time runs out b) people lose interest; 2) it needs a 2-player variant as stated (perhaps with different VPs, etc.). We actually have overlaid BBR on top of GW 1936 and it almost works. Chinese Civil War doesn't quit fit but if the Japanese play the CCP until war it can get close to working. The map is close enough that the BBR rules, NOs, etc. work (can find the right territories, etc.) It is a better game than A&A and not having a 2-player version limits the frequency of play.

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

@@wartable The biggest hurdle to making Global War 1936 into a two-sided game is China. This is a theater where Democracy, Fascism, and Communism all vied. I am assuming you would merge the Comintern and Democracy together, so you might want to play out a hypothetical where the KMT defeated the CCP. To decrease the time, you might want to watch some other YT wars of Global War 1936 and then try starting a game from the position one of the other games was in at say 1941? But take away KMT troops 1:1 with CCP troops remaining on the board? To me, this is ruining so many of the amazing things about the game, but I hear you. The fascinating thing is that I was sure BBR was the perfect game for you, but it seems like you want more. Why is your gaming group not satisfied with BBR? Finally, your group hasn't played v4 GW36. This might be the difference-maker. I have appreciated this discussion, War Table!😊

[@paulcooverjr.6947]

Does the map come with the rule book?

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

You purchase the map, but you may download the rules for free. I would suggest downloading the rules and seeing if you like them. Then you can decide if you want to buy the map.

[@franciscomap75]

My question is why don't two players gang up on the other

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Oh, they do! At the start of the game, the Axis has the initiative and can decide to focus on one particular side. So for example, the Axis could decide to focus USSR and attack from both East and West. Or they could decide to have Germany, Italy, and Japan all focus the Commonwealth in the critically vulnerable period after the fall of France and before the entry of the USA. Since the Axis can focus one side or the other, they can coerce one of the other two sides to turn a blind eye or even withhold support from the picked on side. So Germany and Japan could approach the Commonwealth player and say, "We're either going to gang up on you or USSR. If we go after USSR instead of you, will you withhold lend-lease to the Soviets for the first 3 turns of the invasion?" The problem is, if the Axis get too powerful, then there will be no stopping them. So the most common pairing is the 2nd and 3rd place sides will join forces to try and topple the faction that is in first place. You want to help the weakest opposing faction, but not too much! And how much is too much? The weakest faction will be crying for more help, but you do not want to give them enough help to win. It makes the diplomacy amazing and creates great tension. Let's say the Allies and USSR team up to stop the Axis. The Axis might realize they will have a very difficult time if they keep cooperating and is suggesting that if one or the other wants to win, they should join with the Axis. There is only so much you can cooperate though. Some of the strategic objectives that give a particular faction victory points will lose another side victory points. So you have to be selfish!

[@board-qu9iu]

I was actually going to make a video on how scripting kills a board games longevity

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

100%! This is why I love that GW36 is a 3-way struggle, has multiple excellent techs to chose from, and has strategic objectives that let you pick a different path to victory. No game will be the same!

[@board-qu9iu]

@@GW36_Enthusiast I see 3 reasons for scripting. 1. Too much luck makes games not have any real control (monopoly) 2. Too restricted to the point you have a few options (risk) 3. Too much strategy that it causes a limited meta to form and few strategies that cannot even be switched in game (axis and allies)

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

@@board-qu9iu I am confused. 1. Are you arguing that scripting is the counter to luck? You don't need scripting to counter luck, you need a tremendous variety of viable strategic paths to have a good game. Chess has zero luck other than who goes first, and you don't need any scripting for that game to offer tremendous strategic variability. 2. Are you arguing that scripting helps a game that is already too restricted? How would scripting help in Risk? Sorry to be so dense! I do want to understand this idea! 3. Too much strategy is bad?

[@board-qu9iu]

@@GW36_Enthusiast chess is different in that it has a huge meta I should have stated that

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

@@board-qu9iu Ah, I see! A varied meta is a good thing!

[@marktheshark1968]

👍

[@jpfruc8059]

So it’s like axis and allies

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Take Axis and Allies, make it into a 3-way fight, blow the map up to 4 feet by 8 feet, then playtest the game over years to fine tune the balance!

[@jpfruc8059]

@@GW36_Enthusiast is A&A not balanced

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

@@jpfruc8059 OMG no! It is horribly unbalanced! But if you wanted to compensate, you can use a bidding system where each side bids how many IPP they will accept to have to play the weak side. I will leave it to you to determine which side is the weaker one. Like I said in the video, I used to play up to 6 games at once, so I have played hundreds of games of A&A.

[@justinfanter3620]

This vs 1939?

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Excellent question! First, you should know I'm a totally biased GW36 fanboi! With that said, here are some reasons I prefer GW36. First, it starts in 1936, which adds so much to the game. It takes an average of 2 years to develop a technology, so you get to influence the direction of your tech program much more than you do in 1939. Since it starts earlier, there are much smaller battles so new players can get a gradual introduction to the game as they play the early, more quiet years. And since you start in 1936, you get to completely determine what the composition of your army will be when the hostilities break out. GW36 is a 3-sided game, whereas GW39 is a 2-sided game, and this video details all the benefits of that factor. GW39, imho, is a stepping stone from A&A40 to GW36. GW36 for sure is a more complex game (112 page rulebook for GW36 versus 58 page rulebook for GW39).

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

The Hilltop Pillbox just put out a video called, "You get to be the Supreme Commander" that showcases Global War 1939! Check it out to get a feel for that game.

[@justinfanter3620]

@@GW36_Enthusiast ngl this video convinced me, and now 1936 is sitting downstairs waiting to be set up. I love my 1939 but I am super excited to get 36 rolling soon

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

@@justinfanter3620 I'm delighted to hear this, sir! Don't hesitate to ask me any questions that you have. Check out my "Understanding" series on my channel to help you get started!

[@jackcoleman5955]

I humbly submit my opinion that Anniversary Edition is a masterpiece.

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Hello, good sir! Are you saying A&A Anniversary Edition is a masterpiece? There are a couple things that I don't like about that game. The first is you either start in '41 or '42, so you miss out on the prewar decision-making. It's so fun and strategic to start in 1936 and decide if you want to build up your navy, or spend money on improving a factory to get another tech roll every turn, or bolster your land forces/air force. The second is the research system in that game. You spend 5 IPC's to get a tech roll, then if you get a 6, you choose which table you want to randomly get a tech from. I personally don't like getting a random tech. In GW36, you pick a tech you want to develop and on average, it will take you 4 years (8 turns to develop). Since you are starting in 1936, that means by 1940 you could have several techs, but you focused on them - they weren't random. This opens up opportunities to synergize your economic strategy (where you invest your money) with your research strategy (where you focus tech development) and couple that with your grand strategy of where you will invade and when!

[@BuceGar]

Axis and Allies is a five player game........

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Excellent point and you caught my error! I should have said three *sided* rather than 3 player. There are three sides in Global War 1936, whereas there are only 2 sides in Axis and Allies. Does this make sense why I said there is an entirely new dimension to the game? ☺

[@anjetto1]

World war 1 has always and will always be more important than ww2. In terms of politics and economics and historical legacy. It just doesn't boardgame that well.

[@GW36_Enthusiast]

Agree to disagree. The legacy of WW1 was important in that the resolution was so awful that it made WW2 almost inevitable, whereas WW2 set up a period of relative peace and prosperity for decades. WW2's impact was far more lasting as measured in years. But, let's just let this discussion rest. We will never agree, I'm sure.

[@franciscomap75]

@@GW36_Enthusiast exactly

[@noahloiselle412]

In terms of not boardgaming well, I would look into Global War 1914!

[@Ucronie_di_Roma]

if only the game didn't cost so much...

[@Seawulfnorsemen]

Never played Axis and Allies. Should I go straight for Global War '36?

[@Ucronie_di_Roma]

Axis and Allies is easier to understand at first, plus buying both the map and the units of GW36 costs more than 500€