1942.2 House Rules

[Argothair]

Very cool! I would happily play with these rules. I think you did a great job with the victory city point spread – I can immediately see how it would be both richly thematic and strategically interesting.

Production Caps
The minor factory idea is also very interesting, and something I’ve been playing around with in my head for a while. How does your 10 IPC cap work? Is that for the cost of the 2 units combined, or for each unit? E.g., can I build 2 fighters per turn at a minor factory? It sounds like I can; I just wanted to check. Also, can I upgrade a minor factory the same turn that I’m using it to produce 2 units? Finally, are capital factories restricted to 5 units per turn? I could see that being a real problem for the UK, e.g., if they are trying to ship units from London into France or even to NW Europe, that gets really challenging when you can only fill 2.5 transports per turn, especially with the Axis minor IC in France. I wonder if transports become less useful under your house rules, because if you’re shipping troops more than one sea zone, then you need a $14 pair of transports to deliver 2 units per turn, vs. only a $10 minor factory to deliver 2 units per turn.

India
I notice that you got rid of the starting India factory, as well as its AA gun, and that you gave Japan a third starting transport near the East Indies. Doesn’t this make it impossible for Britain to stage a defense in India? It looks like Britain can have at most 8 ground units in India (plus maybe a couple of fighters?) at the end of B2, even if Britain builds a minor factory there on B1, and I would imagine Japan could defeat those units on J2 without any trouble. Where is Britain supposed to build factories in your setup? South Africa? Eastern Australia? Norway? Just curious.

Baltic Sea
Also, I see Germany has a second starting transport in the Baltic, so presumably they can take Karelia on G1 and likely hold it for several turns, regardless of what Russia does. How is that working out for you? Where does Russia usually wind up stacking its units? West Russia as usual?

Siberia
It looks like you thinned out the overall unit count in Siberia, while also giving the Russians a bit more offensive punch there. I can see where that would discourage the Russians from just retreating all of those units to Moscow, since a few offensive units aren’t as useful for turtling as a large stack of infantry. Have you seen the Russians actually go on the offense in the east and take (and hold?) Manchuria? Do they ever build a minor factory in Siberia, and, if not, how do the Russians resupply the Siberian front?

Sub-Saharan Africa
I love that you’ve given the British some units in Africa that aren’t just Egypt and South Africa. I wonder if you’ve gone overboard, and filled British Africa so chock full of infantry that there’s never any point in shipping American troops into French West Africa. Have you seen any games under these rules where the Axis actually overran Africa? Are the Japanese shipping a lot of troops to east Africa? Do they ever take and hold South Africa?

[arwaker]

Minor Indistrical Complex can build 2 units. Price of each unit can be up to 10. So 2 Fighters Jets are possible, or 2 Cruisers.
The 5 unit limit is hard for Major Complex, especially for UK. They must either invest much in Airforce or navy, or get a lot of Minors somewhere.

I can not tell about any systematics in this setup. We played it only once, and it was fun. Germany invaded London, Russia and Australia killed Japan, finally US took back Africa and won the game.

The general intention was to get rid of well known standard stategy. We want to give the players a variety of different options (Russian Offensive in the East, Japan invading Australia, Germany invading UK, heck even Japan invading Western US etc). I am very sure this first try is far far away from perfect, even far away from good. There are sure a lot of tactics better than others. Unfortunately only with your help, we will be able to find them and even them up with the weaker ones.
I hate these standard maneuvers, sinking this navy in G1, stacking up there in R1 etc … We want fresh and new games, with uncertain outcome. And we want navy. Thats why we added all those additional ships to the board. We had quite a long time to balance the UK indian ocean navy. But we suck, our game experience is small, we play all those other games as well.

Nevertheless, we would be happy if some of you pros would try this set of house rules, and tell us the opinion, and things to make better.

[baron Münchhausen]

Did you read that thread?
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39198.msg1621241#msg1621241
It provides changes to game dynamics.
Not as much than yours but can help thinking about yours.

[baron Münchhausen]

@arwaker:

Lately we played a few games of 1942 second edition after a long while.
We were not so happy with the very scripted decisions players are bound to, to do the perfect opening. Games always are played very similar. Not enough variety.

We did some thinking, discussed a lot, and finally wrote down this set of rules that we hope improves our gaming experience. We played it once since then, and it was quite fun. Now, as we are far from being pros, we thought it would help to improve balancing, if we ask others about their opinion. Maybe they even like our ideas. And if not, they could at least tell us their opinion about the balance, and how we could improve it.

Three groups of changes: Victory City, Setup, Units

We are curious for your opinion. We enjoyed it a lot and will definitevely keep playing and improving it.

I really like the cost reduced of Cruiser and Battleship. I was amongst the first to promote such cost redux to balance Cruiser.

Why bother to increase the cost of Carrier? Is it that important for balance?
What cases made your mind to give +1 IPC to an already weak 1942.2 Carrier A1 D2 M2 C14 compared to G40 Carrier A0 D2 M2 C16 2 hits?

Do you believe it can be balanced to use OOB set-up with your 1,2,3 pts VCs?

[Caesar-Seriona]

I believe Washington DC and LA should be worth 5 points, not 3 and my justification for this is regardless of which Axis and Allies version you play, USA being invaded is going to be the most unlikely situation to happen even if the US plays “bad” so you should increase the value of controlling US cities for victory condition. With it remaining 3 on par with Moscow, I would rather invade Moscow.

[Corpo24]

Hey Baron,
I just finished a game with your set up.  It played really nice and it was a close game.  The allies eventually won due to some amazing rolls by the Russians at the battle of Moscow.  Anyways great job!

[baron Münchhausen]

Not mine.
It is arwaker set-up.
:-D

[Corpo24]

Doh!  lol. Great set up arwaker! It was really fun :)

[innohub]

Wow.  Just notice this.  Would be great if this is available on TripleA so I can find some buddy to play test more.

[baron Münchhausen]

@innohub:

Wow.  Just notice this.  Would be great if this is available on TripleA so I can find some buddy to play test more.

You can edit your set-up via EDIT mode. Then save this game with a specific name.

For a few modified units,  you have to wait we are on this project of creating a whole lot of options to select according to your taste for G40, then 1942.2.

[General 6 Stars]

I’m thinking about putting these 42 Victory Point conditions in my 40 game. But not change any setup.

I like how Germany doesn’t have to take London or Moscow to win. I may have to tweak it if its to easy for the Axis.

Thanks

[simon33]

I don’t like the idea of allowing a factory producing 2 units on a 1IPC territory. I don’t think Axis have much chance with these changes. I don’t see the need for change?

However, I do like downgrading the SZ37 BB to a Cruiser. I’ve argued for that before.

[arwaker]

After a year break we played a game according to these rules yesterday.
Japan heavy navy focused getting Honolulu, Sydney, Rio de Janero and even San Francisco! Leading to a land war on the American continent.
Meanwhile Russia and Britain heavy focusing Germany, with conquering the whole of northern and eastern Europe (Oslo, Kiev).
But then, Germany seized an opportunity of taking London after Britain player overcomitted and did some bad rolls.
Axis win the game.

It was very confusing, and we did a lot of bad mistakes. But it was fun, and we really had a game with battles at totally new battlefields.

• After Russia and Britain both starting very defensive, Germany and Japan player decided to play an altrenative strategy, attacking US. It worked at least partially.
• Germany forced to play defensive on land, losing total whole of east and north Europe (but defensive Russia took quite a while).
• Japan using heavy Navy and invading Australia, South America and finally even US west coast.
• Land war on the American continent between Japan West coast and US East coast (and Canada a bit).
• Few action in China at all…all players were turteling after the initial clashes. Money was needed elsewhere and infantry could hardly attack alone.
• Tank war in Africa between German Egypt and British South Africa. Both players had minor factories in africa, pumping tanks.
• Great navy clash in the northern Atlantic between US+Royal Navy and the German navy.
• To some bad rolls, British and US player losing atlantic fleet. Germany lost as well nearly whole fleet, but was able to invade exposed London and win the game.
• Maybe one turn later, the Russian steamroller would have taken Berlin.

The changes in Navy Balance (increase offensive power by chaper Battleship and Cruiser) as well as the alternative start setup allows for totally new strategies like “Kill US”. We are still not sure if this setup is balanced, we did only 3 games with this so far. I’d be happy about any feedback.