AAR/AARe House Rule Idea

[d142]

yeah,i dont like those odds, i thought the 1 in 6 chance per unit deficit was 1 die per unit deficit,i.e. ipc value = 8, deficit = 5, roll five dice and for every lets say 1 a unit is destroyed ,i dont think i’d count the AA gun as a defending unit.or the industrial complex, until the next round anyway.i dont like the idea of capturing a high value capital and having it taken away that easily,especially if its a large scale battle and i had lost alot of units,unless the revolt leads to a retreat for the occupier,although that could be impossible by the time the next turn comes around.what do you think,or in the collect income phase the occupier could spend some ipcs to crush the revolt lets say 1d6 + the deficit, kind of like spies and special units after the resistance

[Jennifer]

Well, axis, I agree it would prove for longer campaigns, which in turn would allow an 8 victory city game to become more viable. :P

Also, I know it changes the odds a lot (if you take England and don’t leave a garrison, it automatically reverts to freedom) which is why I also had the other option which stated that if you were just one man short of your garrison requirements, then there was one chance in six, per round, that it would revolt and revert to it’s original nationality.

So, let’s say you have the 3 armor, aa gun and IC, then there would be a 1 in 6 chance, each round, until you get the appropriately sized garrison that it would return to normal.  I think this option is actually the easiest of the options since you don’t have to calculate anything.  You occupy territory X then you need Y number of units equal to X IPC value.  If you don’t have that many units, then a die is cast (1 in 6, just like an AA Gun) to see if X liberates itself.

The die would have to be cast after the turn of the occupier, just to make it easy to remember, I’d say right before collect income.

Also, since Germany/Russia usually don’t have a lot of territories without the number of units needed, it’s not going to take that much longer.  Africa would be an issue, is it worth 9 infantry to keep it pacified?

[Guest]

I use something like that in my house rules for A&A Pacific.  Every area the Japanese conquer requires that they garrison one infantry unit to maintain control.  In all of the conquered areas, the Allies had guerilla movements active, forcing the Japanese to maintain fairly large troop garrisons in each area.  If they do not maintain an infantry garrison, then control is lost, but the Allies need to move either a tank or infantry unit there to regain full control of the area for the purpose of IPC.  This does put a premium on Japan of maintaining its tranports to keep moving infantry units forward to the front.  I could see using the same rule in A&A Europe and Revised, along with Anniversary, especially in Russia and the Balkans.  The Germans never really did control the Pripet Marshes area, and Russian partisans caused them major headaches throughout their lines of communication.  The Yugoslavs tied down 250,000 Axis troops in Yugoslavia, mainly German and Italian.

I like the idea for Africa as well, especially given the German treatment of minorities elsewhere.  Also, without a fleet for supply, the supply lines would be so tenuous as to be ridiculous.

[d142]

@Cmdr:

The die would have to be cast after the turn of the occupier, just to make it easy to remember, I’d say right before collect income.

reply from d142i like the idea of the die being cast before mobilization of new units,on subsequent rounds anyway,because it gives the revolt more chance of success,if i was a resistance fighter thats when i would strike.

@timerover51:

the Allies had guerilla movements active, forcing the Japanese to maintain fairly large troop garrisons in each area.  If they do not maintain an infantry garrison, then control is lost, but the Allies need to move either a tank or infantry unit there to regain full control of the area for the purpose of IPC.

reply from d142
does this mean that japan loses the ipc value?.

i have another idea,what if germany has units in the u.k. and the revolt gets to roll 1 die, per ipc deficit, and destroys that value in ipc’s of units (resistance decides), maybe a d4 - 1 or half a d6, this would force germany to always keep a heavy garrison in the u.k. and completely occupy it eventualy, or it would suffer every round, i think this would work in most regions, although it would stretch the game time.
maybe only in victory cities, heavy resistance areas or guerilla occupied areas.

@Cmdr:

I think this option is actually the easiest of the options since you don’t have to calculate anything.  You occupy territory X then you need Y number of units equal to X IPC value.  If you don’t have that many units, then a die is cast (1 in 6, just like an AA Gun) to see if X liberates itself.

reply from d142does this mean if i have an ipc deficit of 3, and roll 3 dice if i get a 1 on any dice it is liberated?.

[Jennifer]

Actually d142, I was thinking on it some more and I think any deficit should be as bad as any other deficit, just from a game mechanic’s point of view.

Therefore, if Germany had 1 infantry in London, then England would get a 1 in 6 chance of liberation.  If Germany had 7 infantry in London, then England would get a 1 in 6 chance of liberation.

However, to compensate for the reduced odds of liberation, only infantry would be counted as garrison units.  Therefore, Germany could have 125 tanks in London and if no garrison infantry were present, then England would have a 1 in 6 chance of liberation.

This is, of course, per round, until the garrison is stationed there.

I was also thinking of territories were 0 IPC or 1 IPC would not need a garrison as there is obviously not much of value in those territories and in some cases, there is hardly a civilian population to rise up anyway.  This would free Germany significantly in Africa (2 Infantry for Egypt + 2 Infantry in S. Africa would be all is required, that’s a 12 IPC investment for +9 IPC in gain a round.)  And it would free up Japan a bit because they would not have to garrison the Siberian Tundra nor would America have to garrison silly things like New Guinea.

[d142]

yeah, i think the idea of no garrison in 0 ipc value regions is a good idea, as for the 1 in 6 chance to defeat an army of 7 infantry and 125 tanks ,i disagree, my thoughts were about a resistance type ,small scale skirmish and sabotage force, that could disrupt or disable the occupier, or even banish them altogether with good dice roll’s, unless the occupying force could manage to bring in high value units to reduce the number of dice roll’s and damage the resistance could do, i dont think it would be worth keeping 6 -36 ipc’s worth of infantry in a region to keep an ipc value of only 2 -12,
maybe a scaled down garrison would work better, i.e a region of ipc value 3 would need 2 units and a region of value 6 would need 4 units, anything less and there would be a revolt.
about the 1 ipc value regions like africa and other places, i think if they are unoccupied there could be a dice roll to determine if a force is successful in capturing it unless there is more than 1 or 2 infantry in the invading force, this would only apply to conquering forces, if they leave on a subsequent turn they could risk a guerilla type operation,
like timerover51 described.

[italiansarecoming]

here is an awesome hopuse rule every 2 turns germany gets a free tank from germany/italy or in the battle field and 1 inf in suez canal on every turn do these look apropriate for a balanced gaem it shows egyptian might and panzers of how hitler wanetd bigger and better tanks (the movement of his tanks clsoe to the end of the war sucked because they used some things not meant to carry that much weight so they had to amek them drive slower)

[d142]

yeah, i think that could work, seeing how difficult it is for the axis to win, maybe after round 5, germany could purchase 1 tank for 3 ipc’s every round and that tank would only have a movement of 1, and they could get 1 infantry every turn if they control trans-jordan and anglo-egypt, would this idea work, transport units by air, instead of paying 15 ipc’s for a bomber, a transport plane could be purshased for 12 ipc’s, this could transport the same as a transport ship, although it can only land in friendly regions, and cannot attack,

[italiansarecoming]

thank you for agreeing with em and yes transport planes would be good but they would only be able to carry infintry 1 inf-2 inf no tanks or artillery

[d142]

i would definetely go with the 2 infantry option, simply because i think the cost out-weigh’s the gain if you are only carrying 1 infantry. and they could be used like paratroopers, maybe the cost could be revised to 13 or 14 to counter balance the advantage you get from the longer range transport

[italiansarecoming]

i can see that but i would go 13 because transports can carry an artillery and inf./ 1 armour but the transport plane could not carry tanks and artillery only 1-2 inf.

[Jennifer]

If you want to go the route of Free Infantry I would say:

Russia gets 1 Free Infantry if they own Norway, W. Russia and Ukraine
Germany gets 1 Free Infantry if they own Egypt, Trans-Jordan and Persia
England gets 1 Free Infantry if they own Egypt, Trans-Jordan and Persia
Japan gets 1 Free Infantry if they own India, China and Sinkiang
America gets 1 Free Infantry if they own Philippines, China and Sinkiang OR Kwangtung, China and Sinkiang

That’s per round you own those three territories.  Notice how many of them are mutually exclusive so not everyone can own them all, and they help direct the conflict across the board. (Russia can attack Japan to prevent them from getting free infantry.  The middle east is now a target.  The pacific is now a target.)

[d142]

here’s a rule that i think will work, transport plane’s, cost,15/move,6/defend,1/, they can carry 1 artillery or 2 infantry. they can carry 1 tank, or 1 infantry and 1 artillery, only with the heavy bomber’s development, they can move in the combat or non-combat move phase. when carrying a tank or artillery long range aircraft does not apply. i think i will try this out in the next game.

[italiansarecoming]

ok 1 artillery is less then 1 tank and 1 inf. i think 1 artillery and 1inf. no armour/tanks are allowed in transport planes