So i propose we just add a new forth category of  Atomic research level 1, 2 and 3. 1 and 2 do nothing and 3 gets you the bomb as long as you have one additional tech that becomes 'the delivery system': The cost of each research could be altered to 8 per or 10 per due to the high costs of this research.

Heavy bombers allows the delivery system to be by the bomber

Rockets allows you to shoot the A-bomb as per rocket rules

Heavy Artillery can also be considered as a delivery system

Also forgot to mention AA guns should have no effect on bombers dropping the weapon. The altitude required to drop such a weapon is way out of the AA gun range, not to mention the rules is you can only build one at a time and to lose it would be a huge waste.

yes, these are good research rules. I love atomic artillery.
Atomic Bombers should be able to be shot down by interceptors though, right?
and 8 IPCs is high enough.

Again here is my suggestion for the atomic bomb stats

Cost: 15, only one can be built by each country each turn.
Movement: Infinitenly across land
can be delivered by advanced artillery, rockets, heavy bomber.

players chooses between military targets or cites if it is in an IC zone. Otherwise it is against military targets
Against Military targets: roll four dice and hits are score on a four or less. After the combat round in which the atom bomb is used the combat stops, and the attacker must retreat unless he has killed all the defenders.

Against Cities: 3dice damage IC temporarily, and 1 D6 damages it permenently.

After an atomic bomb attack, the atom bomb is it destroyed

The partisan piece for UK should be an old farmer with a longbow 

a yeomen i think they are called. Very good.

what about if 'neutrals' were not allowed as IC build locations.  Then the Allies would have to think more about backing up a diplomatic success with troops, lest the Axis swoop in and snag it away?

do you think it should cost something to declare war on a neutral?
otherwise the Axis can swoop in and snag Spain whether it is with the allies or not.

I dont really like this converting neutrals that are pro-axis to the allies. I dont see what it has to do with World War 2, especially when the game starts in 1941.

have you seen pics of hiroshima or nagasaki (like the one I attached)?  those were one bomb, one city, quarter-million dead, several kilometers in all directions from ground zero obliterated...

fine, explain to me how this paragraph makes sence

I believe it is unclear and saying something that is untrue

Do you beleive it is clear or saying something that is true?

I think it's about time we introduce tractors into A&A

Let's not forget the famous "69th Tractor Brigade" who helped win the battle of El Aimen by literally "paving the way" for the British 7th Armored

is that a joke

I meant it was made for the MB version, not the Nova version. 
Nova version used paper, MB plastic pieces. 

o sorry

5 IPCs! thats a pretty powerful piece.

I like being able to restict your openents movement but it seems so  all or nothing.

How about you roll a die and that is how many units in the territory cannot move.

Maybe you should rename this peice partisans or resistence, since that it has characetistic more closly associated with those units

0   Defense - This unit can stop tanks from blitzing the same as an aa gun can.

thats kind of a crazy rule, i dont c the point in it or the historical backing.

Otherwise my main concern is that i dont think these rules add a lot of stratagy except making three of each players land armies super strong.

Why cant you have naval or air commanders?

Yah it should just be immposibel for nations that lean torwards one side to join the other
What political conditions in the real world would hae lead to spain joining the allies or even allowing them to build up troops and invade europe from there.

I think requiring 3 specific techs would be so much harder to accomplish than getting any 4 techs as I had earlier proposed that Atomic Bombs would almost never be researched in a game before turn 20.

yah thats also a good point.

How about if you have rockets you can just launch the bomb from three spaces away with out a bomber, like  a normal rocket attack

...thank you...

cute

if you are going to try the "read exactly what I wrote and not understand what I said" routine to try and divert attention away from the topic or even the points of contention, then what it actually would have said was that there was one bomb that hit both hiroshima and nagasaki, though they apparently were the same city, killing a total of 250,000.   

right, what you said was extremely unclear so excuse me if i did not know what you were talking about

Bardoly I agree with everyone of your points except i would add that even though the a-bombs attack against military units is not that effective, it should be mor epowerful against land units


And I IL, I like your Tech tree Idea, but why do you need stratgic rockets for atomic weapons? the US did not have stratigic rockets to my knowledge.

I also do not like removing units equal to to the IPC value, it does not imporve atomic weapons ability against more concentrated units and it seems to much like the stratgic attack, they are to similiar for them to be both in the game.

LuckyDay

so how do you propose that these countries that half join the war show up in the game, obviosly all there income and units should not become under the control of a certain player


and instead of showing us how witty you are, cause were all sure your very smart

 why dont you grow up and explain what your talking about

i agree