I have learned that trying to translate the A&A units into actual military units doesn’t work.
You could always set a standard amount for the units (total number of men throughout the war for each nation, divided among the respective pieces and averaged out to assign a static number of “man power” per piece).
Then just change the number of pieces on the board until they match “historical” numbers in terms of placement and troop strength for Spring of 1942.
As for finances, perhaps even the cost of pieces could be changed.
But I’m just throwing out ideas here and if I have the time maybe I can get around to doing a project like this (shouldn’t take more than a couple of hours to figure a(n) “manpower” per nation, but several more hours to assign pieces to the board to reflect those numbers accurately).
@Imperious:
Harris made everything to have balance and those ‘values’ have very marginal relationship to real economic capabilities. The allies should have a 2 to 1 advantage in IPC, but of course that would inbalance the game unless you made some method where the conversion of this money could be impacting the game in any significant way. The Soviets are way too low in IPC as they were twice as strong as Japan, while USA is too weak.
it would be 16 ipc japan and 56 ipc US, with everthing else the same.
yes right like it is already in AAP.
something should engourge more plane buys.
:-o
Back in my Classic AA days, for the first three or four turns I thought of the figures as Army Groups or even Corps/ Air Wings/ Naval Squadrons or Flotillas’, but once the chips stacks began to throw long shadows across the board I made a mental switch and looked at them as the divisions and the special support units of that Corps/Air wing/ Flotilla.
As far as a time frame is concerned, I thought a full turn consisted of a campaign season, about 6 months of actual conflict time, not months per say.
AA is a combination of; Risk, Monopoly and Chess, not a true WWII game recreation. If that is what you seek, there are other games that do that very well. We play it because we like its’ playability, not for accuacy.
Thats’ my thoughts.
Crazy Ivan :roll:
I think that if one tries to figures units sizes and times for A&A he/she will go insane.
:-o
My point exactly, that is why I kept it rather vague, and flexable.
:roll:
AA severly butchers the economy of Russia and bolsters the Japanese and German. In reality Russia could outproduce Germany in any point of the war and Japan could have never moved past mainland China.
things’ll also be different for AAR then it would be for AAE or P. AAE and P are on a smaller scale than AA, so the units should be smaller as well.
AAE
1inf=3-4inf Divisions
1arm=1-2 Atmered divisions
1art=3-4 art divisions
1fg=1200 fgs
1bm=1000bms
1AA=9-10 bateries of AAs
unsure on the rest
You’re not going to figure it out …. 2400 Figs on a carrier?
Exactly my view.
http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=2736&highlight=poor+russia
In my version each of the Allies starts with a 50 IPC income. The downside for Russia is the Xenophonia rule preventing the Western Allies from reinforcing the Eastern Front.
AA severly butchers the economy of Russia and bolsters the Japanese and German. In reality Russia could outproduce Germany in any point of the war and Japan could have never moved past mainland China.
do you play World at war?
I played WaW once. Didn’t like it much. But I’ll give it another try if you think it is worth it.
What do you like about it?
Crazy Ivan
