• @Flashman:

    Might the Russian player decide he doesn’t want a two-front war?  If a Soviet-Japanese conflict does occur the likelihood is that it’ll be fought largely on Russian soil.  Or ice.

    Perhaps the rule should be that USSR and Japan cannot declare war on (i.e. attack) each other if they are already at war with Germany/Italy or UK/USA respectively.  This bind is broken when the relevant capitals are captured; e.g. Russia will only attack Japan after Berlin & Rome have fallen.

    The same thing applies in reverse, that is if Russia is at war with Japan it cannot decide to attack the Euro Axis.

    Of course this effectively locks off the possibility of this war taking place before the game is won, but if players want a game that plays something like the real war something like this is needed.

    Then can’t Russia declare war on Japan and avoid the Euroaxis?


  • @oztea:

    Because it was against the best interests of the Japanese and Soviet governments, I feel that if the pact should be only this.

    “If Japanse units are in Soviet territories, or vice versa, the offending power may only collect one national objective bonus this round.”

    This doesnt hinder either side millitarily, it only represents the reluctance of each nation to fight eachother.

    Or something as similar as a negitive national objective for the pact…because attacking russia was NOT a Japanese National objective, nor was attacking japan a sovied objective.

    Japan: -5 IPCs to fund your war effort in tundra conditions as long as you have units in originaly controled Soviet territory.
    Soviet Union: -5 IPCs to fund your distant war effort as long as you have units in originaly controled Japanese territory.

    I like the negative NO idea, though it would be unprecedented.


  • it would be realistic

    A russo-japanese war was agaisnt the national objectives of both nations. So much so that it should be discouraged


  • I support this Russian/Jap -NO whole-heartedtly. I also think that it should be used for America as well. I think that the game should be balanced so that America is one of the smallest earners in the beginning (with a big negative NO to represent their innocent neutrality) but then looses it when it goes to war. Like instead of 52 to 82, it would be 22 to 62.


  • For Japanese/Russian non-aggression I’m thinking of trying out the following house rules:

    Japan cannot declare war on Russia unless the Axis controls at least one of the following
    1.  London
    2.  Moscow
    3.  Washington, D.C.
    4.  San Francisco
    5.  Every territory with a Chinese roundel on it

    Russia cannot declare war on Japan unless the Allies control at least one of the following:
    1.  Berlin
    2.  Rome and Paris

    If the conditions are met to declare war but the player chooses not to exercise it immediately, he loses the opportunity if he has not done so before the other side re-captures the relevant cities/territories.


  • I plan on staying in, and protecting the russian space just north of manchuria so USSR and USA can use it as a Strategic Bomber base and starve Japan of new units.

  • Customizer

    @calvinhobbesliker:

    @Flashman:

    Might the Russian player decide he doesn’t want a two-front war?  If a Soviet-Japanese conflict does occur the likelihood is that it’ll be fought largely on Russian soil.  Or ice.

    Perhaps the rule should be that USSR and Japan cannot declare war on (i.e. attack) each other if they are already at war with Germany/Italy or UK/USA respectively.  This bind is broken when the relevant capitals are captured; e.g. Russia will only attack Japan after Berlin & Rome have fallen.

    The same thing applies in reverse, that is if Russia is at war with Japan it cannot decide to attack the Euro Axis.

    Of course this effectively locks off the possibility of this war taking place before the game is won, but if players want a game that plays something like the real war something like this is needed.

    Then can’t Russia declare war on Japan and avoid the Euroaxis?

    No; it isn’t allowed to attack the Euros, but it can be attacked by them.  The idea is that neither USSR nor Japan can deliberately fight both wars simultaneously.

  • Customizer

    Just to clarify my suggestion:

    USSR may not initiate a war with Japan if it is already at war with Germany or Italy

    USSR may not initiate a war with Germany or Italy if it is already at war with Japan

    Japan may not initiate a war with USSR if it is already at war with UK/FRANCE/USA

    Japan may not initiate a war with UK/FRANCE/USA if it is already at war with USSR

    The Japan/China situation does not effect these.

    In all cases the bind ends when a capital (or both capitals) of the enemy you are already at war with fall(s).

    It will be seen from this that if the game follows the historical pattern, then USSR & Japan will be trapped in a double-bind preventing them from becoming at war with each other until either the Euro Axis or the Western Allies are defeated.

    I’m thinking about similar restrictions on other powers, for example should UK or France be allowed to declare war on Japan while any of London/Paris/Rome/Berlin is Axis controlled?

    Should Germany and Italy be automatically drawn into war with the USA if Japan attacks it?

    Would Italy declare war on ANY other power unless Germany had already done so?


  • USSR may not initiate a war with Japan if it is already at war with Germany or Italy

    USSR may not initiate a war with Germany or Italy if it is already at war with Japan

    Japan may not initiate a war with USSR if it is already at war with UK/FRANCE/USA

    Japan may not initiate a war with UK/FRANCE/USA if it is already at war with USSR

    This could work.

    I think it needs to be rephrased:

    USSR can’t attack Japan until Germany is defeated
    Japan can’t attack USSR unless one major power ( not ANZAC or China) Have their capital occupied by Germany or Italy.


  • I’m more in favor of a negative national objective (5 or 10 ipcs) for fighting in each others territory. Those rules would very conceivably end up just making the manchurian and siberian zones dmzs until it appears a capital is going down. the -NO still requires a military presence.


  • either a special -NO

    or the much simpler rule that all NO income is halfed (or maybe even 100% forefit) while you are breaking the pact.

    So to monetarily sanction breaking the pact we have 3 options here:
    1. A special -5/10 NO for each power if they attack the other unprovoked (I prefer 5 over 10)
    2. If you attack the other power unprovoked, all other NOs you have generate only half (rounded down)
    3. If you attack the other power unprovoked, all other NOs you have are forefit to the bank.

    In all of these cases, your economic situation returns to normal once you are no longer violating the pact.

  • '22 '19 '18

    @Imperious:

    USSR may not initiate a war with Japan if it is already at war with Germany or Italy

    USSR may not initiate a war with Germany or Italy if it is already at war with Japan

    Japan may not initiate a war with USSR if it is already at war with UK/FRANCE/USA

    Japan may not initiate a war with UK/FRANCE/USA if it is already at war with USSR

    This could work.

    I think it needs to be rephrased:

    USSR can’t attack Japan until Germany is defeated
    Japan can’t attack USSR unless one major power ( not ANZAC or China) Have their capital occupied by Germany or Italy.

    If you put all these restrictions on USSR and Japan, then you have Pac 40 all over again, where Japan doesn’t have to protect it’s northern boarder and is free send all troops for the J3 India crush.


  • @Flashman:

    Just to clarify my suggestion:

    USSR may not initiate a war with Japan if it is already at war with Germany or Italy

    USSR may not initiate a war with Germany or Italy if it is already at war with Japan

    Japan may not initiate a war with USSR if it is already at war with UK/FRANCE/USA

    Japan may not initiate a war with UK/FRANCE/USA if it is already at war with USSR

    The Japan/China situation does not effect these.

    In all cases the bind ends when a capital (or both capitals) of the enemy you are already at war with fall(s).

    It will be seen from this that if the game follows the historical pattern, then USSR & Japan will be trapped in a double-bind preventing them from becoming at war with each other until either the Euro Axis or the Western Allies are defeated.

    I’m thinking about similar restrictions on other powers, for example should UK or France be allowed to declare war on Japan while any of London/Paris/Rome/Berlin is Axis controlled?

    Should Germany and Italy be automatically drawn into war with the USA if Japan attacks it?

    Would Italy declare war on ANY other power unless Germany had already done so?

    I like these!


  • @cond1024:

    @Imperious:

    USSR may not initiate a war with Japan if it is already at war with Germany or Italy

    USSR may not initiate a war with Germany or Italy if it is already at war with Japan

    Japan may not initiate a war with USSR if it is already at war with UK/FRANCE/USA

    Japan may not initiate a war with UK/FRANCE/USA if it is already at war with USSR

    This could work.

    I think it needs to be rephrased:

    USSR can’t attack Japan until Germany is defeated
    Japan can’t attack USSR unless one major power ( not ANZAC or China) Have their capital occupied by Germany or Italy.

    If you put all these restrictions on USSR and Japan, then you have Pac 40 all over again, where Japan doesn’t have to protect it’s northern boarder and is free send all troops for the J3 India crush.

    That’s indeed the other side of the coin…

  • Customizer

    @cond1024:

    @Imperious:

    USSR may not initiate a war with Japan if it is already at war with Germany or Italy

    USSR may not initiate a war with Germany or Italy if it is already at war with Japan

    Japan may not initiate a war with USSR if it is already at war with UK/FRANCE/USA

    Japan may not initiate a war with UK/FRANCE/USA if it is already at war with USSR

    This could work.

    I think it needs to be rephrased:

    USSR can’t attack Japan until Germany is defeated
    Japan can’t attack USSR unless one major power ( not ANZAC or China) Have their capital occupied by Germany or Italy.

    If you put all these restrictions on USSR and Japan, then you have Pac 40 all over again, where Japan doesn’t have to protect it’s northern boarder and is free send all troops for the J3 India crush.

    Only if there is an exact historical play-out, with Germany invading Russia and Japan attacking the Western Allies before  R & J get to grips.
    And of course if the double-bind occurs then USSR is free to send all Siberian units to the European front, so the pact should always balance out.

    If Japan decided to join in an invasion of Russia before starting a Pacific war then the western Allies  would be free to send all units to the European front AND pick their moment to kick-off versus Japan.

    The thought is that both these powers were acting essentially alone, were somewhat paranoid, did not trust their allies, and would never have embarked on a war with both main opponents at the same time.

    Hitler of course had no such qualms having massively under estimated his enemies, and quite happily attacked whenever he saw a chance.


  • but doesnt this whole scenerio build……acme walls?

    and would it not be simpler and more realistic to just impose monitary penalties?
    not only because these actions went against BOTH powers real life_national objectives_, but both actions were deemed cost ineffective by both powers. Either by the Soviets having to fuel such a far away war, or the Japansese having to commit to a war in such hostile (especialy to them) terrain.


  • but in the actual rules they can fight, correct? or are there rules against this.


  • in the standard game there is no restriction on japan fighting the USSR

    in real life there would have been no phisical barrier to it either, breaking a treaty during war time carries no penalty, you arent going to get sanctioned by the UN or anything….because you probably already are.

    in simulations however, account should be taken of the fact that

    1. Neither power wanted to fight eachother becuase they just did in the 1930’s and it was a bloodbath
    2. Conflict in that area is expensive because of distance and climate, and there is little reward in minerals or oil (that is, little that is easy to extract)
    3. And both powers had larger concerns in other areas.

    I am disapointed the game does not have a pact rule, i hope 18 infantry and vast distance can simulate it enough


  • I love how half of the posts here revolve around some “new” house rule.  95% of the people out there don’t even have the game yet, but everyone is already trying to “fix” it……get back to me with all your ideas in say, 10-15 games.

    Staying on topic here…I would stack and stay one back from border…holds some of the Japanese back from China/India and can be used as a bomber base (lots of US planes buzzing around the board in my opinion - fastest way for US to get 82 IPC’s into the fight)


  • @Plasticdeathbydice:

    I love how half of the posts here revolve around some “new” house rule.  95% of the people out there don’t even have the game yet, but everyone is already trying to “fix” it……get back to me with all your ideas in say, 10-15 games.

    Staying on topic here…I would stack and stay one back from border…holds some of the Japanese back from China/India and can be used as a bomber base (lots of US planes buzzing around the board in my opinion - fastest way for US to get 82 IPC’s into the fight)

    The new rules are for PACIFIC40, not Europe…

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 27
  • 10
  • 4
  • 24
  • 21
  • 5
  • 11
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

36

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts