I agree, we should leave histories micro details to the volumes of role playing books.
I truly love the Global game but it is really difficult to teach new players who didn’t have the benefit of learning the simpler and more basic Classic version. With all the new variables I fear that A&A is drifting away from that pure simplicity I liked in the original board game.
When ever someone approaches me and asks if I will teach them how to play, the first thing I warn them is that its a very complex game which takes a lot of time to understand. Sometimes I feel like stripping the game down to its core, but no-one will play that game with me (lol).
I agree with you Young Grasshopper. I love the A&A board games because they are somewhat simple. Yeah, they got a lot of rules, especially the 1940 versions with all the political situations. However, compared to something like the A&A Miniatures games, the board games are much simpler. I tried getting into the more tactical level games, but there was just too much to remember. When you have to keep referring to the rulebook for almost every movement or battle, you start losing the fun of the game.
This is one thing that kind of worries me about the people that want to keep adding stuff to A&A like new units, different classes of units (light tanks, medium tanks, heavy tanks, tank destroyers, etc.) and specialized units like Soviet Guards, Waffen SS, US Marines and such. There are even some who want to incorporate a 12 sided dice system. I like the 6 sided dice we currently use. Plus, you can’t get FMG Combat Dice in 12 side. These things make me worry that the A&A board games are starting to get too complex.
I agree with you Young Grasshopper. I love the A&A board games because they are somewhat simple. Yeah, they got a lot of rules, especially the 1940 versions with all the political situations. However, compared to something like the A&A Miniatures games, the board games are much simpler. I tried getting into the more tactical level games, but there was just too much to remember. When you have to keep referring to the rulebook for almost every movement or battle, you start losing the fun of the game.
This is one thing that kind of worries me about the people that want to keep adding stuff to A&A like new units, different classes of units (light tanks, medium tanks, heavy tanks, tank destroyers, etc.) and specialized units like Soviet Guards, Waffen SS, US Marines and such. There are even some who want to incorporate a 12 sided dice system. I like the 6 sided dice we currently use. Plus, you can’t get FMG Combat Dice in 12 side. These things make me worry that the A&A board games are starting to get too complex.
HALALUYA!
When I see some of the house rules being suggested, adding in all those things you mentioned, it really takes away the character of the game. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for house rules and tweeking as long as they run parallel to the core mechanics of Axis & Allies. some people want to add game mechanics that look a lot like “The Third Reich”, Memoirs 44, or even War Hammer. I believe A&A house rules should look like A&A rules. a perfect example is the navy and air bases, I love these units because they are simple yet add so much to game play.
If you want to add in an active Free french, then I really think you need to add in Vichy rules, especially for North Africa. Also the French navy needs to be increased a little, considering the historical French Navy, France is missing a Battleship and a transport and some of it (probably a Cruiser) should start out off the coast of FIC.
The Growing FREE FRENCH
_I have given France the ability to build new units even though Paris is under the Axis boot. They are produced in the same way Chinese Forces are produced in AA50 (With revision) France can build ONE INFANTRY unit per turn. This unit can be placed on any original and Allied controlled FRENCH territory that is not Axis Occupied or controlled. This will recreate the slow build of FREE FRENCH forces coming from all over the Empire but not allow them to over power the Axis at any one point alone. Indeed they will sometimes be a burden to the Western Allies as they may need to be Transported around etc… as was the case. If every FRENCH territory on the Game board is AXIS controlled, than the unit will be built in LONDON. (If London is not also AXIS controlled)
The French did indeed have a substantial Military Force in INDO-CHINA as they were fighting the Communists in the Second Indo-China War in 1940. I have represented this by adding 1 INF to the territory in the start up._
This is an awesome house rule and I think my playing group will adopt it. This provides a unique opportunity in a number of creative and fun ways to play the often neglected areas of the board. Thank you for sharing this one!
What did the French contribute? Other than allowing the English to sink their warships at oran i cant think of much. The french did more harm to the allies than to the axis because of their willingness to give their ships over to the nazis because of mere pride.
Not all French were bad. There was the French underground. They didn’t do much but did do something. But mostly I agree w/you.
What did the French contribute? Other than allowing the English to sink their warships at oran i cant think of much. The french did more harm to the allies than to the axis because of their willingness to give their ships over to the nazis because of mere pride.
Actually, the French didn’t give up their warships to the Axis. They scuttled their own fleet at Toulon to keep them out of German hands.
But the English did destroy the bulk at Oran because the English admiral did not send a high ranking officer to talk too the French admiral and so the french would not go out and fight with the English… they decided to sit in the harbor and wait for the axis powers to come.
There is a game we used to play where once the French fell the fate of the fleet was decided by rolling the dice. I think it was a 1 & 2 it turned Axis a 3 & 4 it was destroyed and a 5 & 6 it tuned Allied.
It’s interesting to think of all the different possibilities that could result from the roll of the dice, roll each boat or group separately, the Axis and the Allies split the rolls so that one side doesnt roll all the rolls
that actually sounds like a great idea, more historical. In real life the english seized all french ships at The English Isles and Cairo. Than they sent a battle fleet to oran to give the french the options to fight with them, sail to America and disband, or be destroyed. They chose to be destroyed obviously but that does sound like a very realistic rule.
The game you are talking about is World at War.
France is fine in my opinion. And it will groesly imbalance the game to give them a free infantry everyturn.
Imagine the bulk up in FIC, when the japanese end up attacking.
What are the Axis getting to balance this change - it better be all of north africa - and southern france automatically.
The game you are talking about is World at War.
France is fine in my opinion. And it will groesly imbalance the game to give them a free infantry everyturn.
Imagine the bulk up in FIC, when the japanese end up attacking.
What are the Axis getting to balance this change - it better be all of north africa - and southern france automatically.
I agree, It seems unfathomable to give the allies any additional “benefits” while keeping the axis status quo. That would be a gross injustice to game play when the game is already tilted somewhat in the allies favor.
You could give Germany control of SFrance and Morocco to Tunisia, leave the units static and sink the French Med fleet. That would be similar to the old Xeno game, Perhaps add Syria to the mix.
That old Xeno game was actually pretty good, but I remember it having some big issues, like if Germany didn’t take Poland on the first turn Russia would take it and stack there.
What did the French contribute? Other than allowing the English to sink their warships at oran i cant think of much. The french did more harm to the allies than to the axis because of their willingness to give their ships over to the nazis because of mere pride.
The French didn’t hand a single warship over to the Axis. Many French warships were interned in British ports, sunk by the British, or in the case of Richelieu, trapped in an uncompleted state in a inadequate French African port. The rest were based in Toulon in Provence, where the Germans and Italians attempted to seize the French ships (with most of the ships going to Italy as compensation for losses sustained by the Italian Navy against the Royal Navy), but Jean de Laborde ordered the ships scuttled without hesitation. The Germans on the quay announced to Laborde on the Strasbourg that they were boarding, he shouted back “You are too late, the ship is sinking.” Which it certainly did. The French scuttled their entire fleet, they were a professional military organisation and I do not know of any Navy that has ever willingly turned its warships over to anybody. The Germans sailors and officers scuttled their ships in Scapa Flow when they found out the ships were to be parceled out to the Allies. The French Navy is a very old and very proud institution, it wasn’t about to meekly hand over its ships to the Germans, no sir.
As for the topic at hand, I’m in favour of improving the French position with House Rules. I very much respect the French (probably the only person I know who does), and I was saddened when they were pretty much made cannon-fodder for the Germans. I created a thread some time ago addressing the issue of France, but I digress. I think that the addition of a French infantry in Indo-China, and possibly a cruiser there is a good addition. I was also thinking about adding a naval base there, since Japan’s reason for taking it over was obviously for the naval facilities in Saigon and other ports. I would like to add a battleship too, for historical accuracy, France’s Navy was, after all, superior to that of Italy’s, and France even had an aircraft carrier (the Béarn). However, the Italian Navy is already hard pressed to defend against the existing British Fleet, so the addition of French capital ships would likely guarantee that Italy’s entire fleet will be destroyed on the 1st turn. With only 10 IPC income, Italy cannot hope to rebuild any sort of surface fleet for several turns, by which time the UK and France would have likely thrown what little forces they have in Africa out.
I think the reason for France, is to create a variable for the amount of pieces Germany has left on the Euro. Continent. If you do well you have a lot of pieces, If you do poorly then you have less.
This way no two games will look the same at the end of Germ. turn …… well maybe real close, I’m sure it could happen.
Heck France can keep that dd for a long time along with some Inf. they still have a turn
P.S. If France doesn’t fall on the opening round, don’t reset keep going. I’ve seen France survive the first round in 3 games, I think the Axis won one lost one and one undecided. plus they could get liberated.
What about Oran? The french said they wouldn’t fight with the british because they sent a low ranking officer to meet them, instead they sat in the port and waited for the Nazis. The British than destroyed the French fleet and went home.
I think the French have gotten a really bum rap concerning WW2. A lot of you guys make it sound like the first German boot stepped on French soil and France just gave everything up.
I have seen footage from the Spring 1940. The French army fought very hard and bravely against the German invasion. The problem was their leaders were not ready to handle the German “Blitzkrieg” style of warfare, which at that time was fairly new. The Generals of the day were still using WW1 type tactics and were simply overwhelmed by such a fast-moving type of offense.
The French sacrificed a lot of troops killed and captured at Dunkirk so that mostly British troops could get away.
They made Paris an ‘open city’ to keep it from getting bombed into ruins like Warsaw and Rotterdam, thus saving civilian lives.
When the Vichy government was created, Marshal Petan, a hero of WW1, was put in charge and cooperated with the Germans in order to keep his people safe. For trying to protect his citizens, he faced a War Crimes trial.
At Oran, the British fleet basically gave the French fleet an ultimatum, “Surrender immediately or be destroyed”, and gave little time for a response before opening fire and killing 1,000 French sailors.
Also, when the US and British landed at Morocco in Operation Torch, the Vichy French practially let them land almost totally unopposed so they could defeat the Axis, although they did put up a fight against the Allies in Algeria for some reason.
Also, the French stopped Italy cold in Southern France. It was only after the French had to surrender to Germany that Italy got any French territory. By the way, what about the Italian contribution to the Axis? They had to pretty much get bailed out by Germany in every campaign. I don’t hear anyone saying they are wussies or panzies.
I just think you all should cut France a break and stop bashing them all the time. They weren’t cowards or sissies, they were just faced with an overwhelming force.
How many does it take to defend Paris?
…who knows, they never tired :-D
Also, the French stopped Italy cold in Southern France.
Well, so did almost everybody else the Italian went up against :D
I just think you all should cut France a break and stop bashing them all the time. They weren’t cowards or sissies, they were just faced with an overwhelming force.
Sure - France has a very bad rep - not only when it comes to WW2, but military in general - it’s just an internet thing most of the time.
However much of the situation for how France is handled in this game is due to game balance. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to accurately map up a strategy game mimic real life’s complexity. It’s not - I hope - because the makers are anti-French, it’s just that the game would be hard to balance as a 1940 game, without doing some very tricky rules.
