political leadership meeting

you may call a meeting of your allies to discuss strategy,
 

does this mean you normally dont get to talk to your allies

"National and Communist Chinese Alliance" number of Chinese infantry double"

"Islamic Revolt" Three German infantry are created in Trans-Jordan and in Persia. They immediatly attak Allied forces there

"D-Day" (still cant beleive this one has not already been said) you and one of your allies may attack one territoy togther

"Indian National Army" when the axis attack India, they may play this card to gain four infantry for the attack

"BlitzKrieg" after you conduct combat phase, you may make additional combat moves and conduct combat with tanks, fighters, and bombers, that still have movement left even if they have already paticipated in combat

"Italian Incompetence" all Italian units attack and defend with a -1 modifier for a whole round

"Soveit Incompetence" all Russian units attack and defend with a -1 modifier for a whole round

"Hitler assination attempt succeeds" (I dont know, what would happen?)

"Patriotic War" If one of you home territries is attacked you may immediatly place three infantry in that territroy

"Rail Movement" Reposition up to eight units in your next non combat phase

"Fast Warships" all you warships have a movenet of three for one turn / your cursiers and carriers have a movement of three for one turn( i dont know which)


How exactly will this card work? when will they be drawn and when do you get to play them? Are they secret? should you have to pay some IPCs to use them? and would their be multiple decks for diffrent types of cards you would draw for diffrent situations? maybe you should draw additional cards when you take victory cities or win major battles

First I think alot of people would disagree with you besides me.

Second even in Japan and the Soveit Union had weak "national morale" you are still discounting the effect caualties have.

You must agree that Americans could not have had the will to fight if it took millions of their dead soldeirs to do it. Dosen't that show week morale when compared to the millions of Soveits and Japanese killed. and how about the Japanese soldeirs we kept finding in pacific who thought the war was still going up until the 70s. The Japanese people had never heard the Emperoprs voice until he announced their surrender on the radio. He was God. Surrender was the ultimate shame for them, if the emperor had not told them to do it, their would have been unbeleivable bloodshed on both sides

I am not saying the US would surrender, I am saying that Americans in World War Two didnt have the gut for millions of caualties, their would have been an armistice or something besides unconditional surrender 

And it wasn't that the emperor was having a bad day, the Americans had been fire bombing Japan for awhile before they dropped the two A-bombs. Saying Japan had poor national morale becasue they surrendered when two of their cities disappeared is like saying someone is a bad swimmer becasue they lost to Michael Phelps.

If a nation is willing to do whatever their emperor says, that is high national morale. production is already represented in the game. national morale should represent the willingness of a country to continue the fight. I think Japanese would have fought just as long and hard and probalby longer and harder than any of the other powers. Sure the US is a much better system to die for, but thats all the more reason to stay home, forget Europe. It is the people of horrible countries like the Soveit Union who were willing to sacrfice everything for their nation.

IL, what is your definition of national morale, because the Japanese were preparing to fight to the last man, women and child

I dont think national morale should be associated directly with IPC production

well IPC is directly related to how well a nation is doing, plus the US player has perhaps the greatest historical resolve to win the war and had the best morale. Rate the nations in rank according to how you feel they wanted to win the war and you will see a more or less correlation of this based on how many IPC they had.

for the axis Germany had the high morale

for the allies USA UK

least was Italy and possible the Soviets who could have lost it and had Russian units fighting against the Soviets!

I dont see how that is true at all, if national morale is the resolve of the people, government, and the military to fight a war, then what shoes the US having the highest morale. I think the US player should have to think about all of his battles very carefully and determine what this would do for the home front. What do think would have happened if 1 million Americans were killed attacking Japan. What if 1 million Americans were killed and the attacked failed. Sure you might still control fifteen victory cities, but that is not how politicians are elected.

Just look at Korea, Veitnam, Iraq. the effect on National Morale by how many bombs you make or how well you do on the battlefeild, is dwarfed when compared too the lives that are being lost

Lets look at the Soveit Union. sure maybe they could have had a seperate peace when Stalin was having his mental breakdown during 41 or if Moscow was captured, and I argee the outcome of battles should have a big effect on national morale, but once the Russians started fighting back and Stalin made it clear that it was his goal to destroy Germany, the Russians were prepared to lose millions and millions, which they did.

Also stratigic bombing should have an effect on national morale

maybe

I dont think national morale should be associated directly with IPC production, sure the US had the most resources and the largest econamy, but could they have withstood over a million causalties like the Germans and Soveits.

Everyone who reads this, the next game you play, see if you can count how many peices each sides losses
and report back here

then we can figure out a historical and playable national morale for each nation

For each unit you lose, you lose one morale, + plus their will be other modifers and oppertunities to gain morale

when you morale hits zero, your nation must offer peace, the oppsing side can either accept or reject it. If they accept that nation surrenders and is treated as a neutral unless it is again attacked. the oppsing side can also reject peace and play continues as usaul

why cant their be a semi-serious Axis and allies modern game insteaded eight madeup countries fighting each other over nothing.

if you shoot you researchers shouldn't subsequent reasearch rolls be more likely to succeed due to increased motivation

I kind of like the new research rules though, where your researchers dont go away. I think we should incorporate them into targeted techs

so building infantry for use in Russia is useless?

just buy 2 inf to protect germany?

If tech is targeted should you have to declare which tech your researchers are for when you purcahse them, and should they then cost 10 or 15 IPCs?
or maybe you need multiple breakthoughs depeding on the tech to develop it

How do you do it with Germany four spaces away from Moscow

I was thinking, building all infantry and artillery the first turn, the next two turns build tanks, then the fourth turn building aircraft

Since the Eastern front is usally decideded in the first four turns, is there even a point to building German infantry to fight in the east after the first turn.

also, even if you build infatry the first turn, you have no knew firepower on the eastern front for at least another turn, which can severly weaken you + you have no money to protect your navy in the baltic

so are infantry worth it, or are tanks and bombers where its at?

yah, scratch political leaders, but lets work on Military leaders, I like the diferent attributes you have come up with, how many rounds of combat each leader can lead his men into, the amount of caaulaties that can be sustained, liklyhood of being able to make a second attack,

also, how about units not attaking with a leader can only attack for 1  round of combat

Each country should have a diffrent number of military leaders, each with their own paticular stats

For the national morale i think you need to look into a different system, otherwise people are not going to be able to build that much, also I would think the Soveit Union would have a much higher national morale that lets say the US. The Russians, took far more losses and went through much more pain yet still were very effective on the battlefeild. The Germans and the Japanese thought the west was soft and could be weakened by significant casulaties.

I think National morale should be respresented buy how many losses a nation can take before it pulls out of the war

On supply, your system seems very complex for such a simple thing, why not just have one type of supply that does everything, instead of three. you get basicly the same thing and it is still a really cool idea.

I think if we do all these changes right, then combine them with the a version of AARHE Lite that is compatible with AA50 we could slow down thegame a bit, instead of each turn representing 4-6 months, they would each represent a season. and once each turn represents a season it is going to be a lot easeir to introduce weather rules

I am going to try a game of AA50 with rules from AARHE Lite in the coming weeks, once i have three or four more game of reg AA50 under my belt. I will then try to implement some of you rules

Also, Imperious Leader, is this the right way to go about experimenting for AA50HE, using the fundemental concepts from AARHE and building ontop of that, or should we just start AA50HE from the ground up.

Why are there battleships?