Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

Grasshopper's Alternative R&D

House Rules

3.1k

Y

Young Grasshopper Sponsor
last edited by

@Vance:

Thanks YG. If you don’t mind I think I will post “espionage” as a separate house rule that could work with your tech system, or with just about any tech system for that matter. You never know someone might use it or get an idea from it. I love the idea of STEALING the other guy’s tech LOL

Hey man, feel free to use any of my ideas for separate rules, I just ripped off some good ones from Axisplaya and I didn’t feel bad about it one bit 😏 As for espionage, I thought stealing a tech from an enemy might be to powerful for the 10 spot, so I modified it to say develop any tech that an enemy power possesses.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0

3 / 3

Featured Topics

League rules idea: mulligans for patrons

Guadalcanal Tournament at Strategicon (Los Angeles) Feb. 17, 2024

T-shirts, Hats, and More

global 1940

164

anniversary

1914

tips&tricks

1942 2nd ed

bm3

video

axis & allies

Suggested Topics

P

[Global 1940] Research & Development

House Rules
• r & d global 1940 • • Pitt79

9

0
Votes

9
Posts

605
Views

J

@Pitt79 please elaborate the usa russia scenario thanx
W

Research & Development House Rule

House Rules
• • • WinterAdler

1

0
Votes

1
Posts

357
Views

W

Hey Guys,

I am working on an house rule for the research and development in G40!

The plan is that every nation has the chance to do research (except china).
This gives new strategic possibilities. For example, German rocket attacks in round one.
The ipc expenditure is calculated from the income of the respective nation:

What do you think??
?

Alternate Victory points - 1940 Pacific

House Rules
• • • A Former User

1

0
Votes

1
Posts

227
Views

?

To add some diversity and other strategies to winning.

18 points to win (Axis pts/Allied pts) Axis starts with 8 Allied starts with 11

2/4 Japan - Tokyo
1/1 Kiangsu - Shanghai
1/1 Iwo Jima
1/2 Okinawa
1/1 Caroline Islands
2/1 Korea & Manchuria
2/2 India - Calcutta
2/2 Philippines - Manila
3/2 Western US - San Francisco
1/1 Kwangtung - Hong Kong
2/2 New South Wales - Sydney
2/1 Hawaiian Islands - Honolulu
1/0 Aluetain Islands
1/1 Solomon Islands
1/1 Dutch NG & New Guinea
1/1 Marshall & Gilbert Islands
1/1 Java
1/0 No Chinese units
1/0 No UK controlled ports
0/1 No JA units outside Jpn, Ch, & Kor
B

Baron M's G40HR Roster: 3-planes carrier, 6 IPCs Fighter A2D2 & Sub A3D1C7

House Rules
• • • baron Münchhausen

7

0
Votes

7
Posts

1.7k
Views

B

@Admiral:

Hi Baron,

I know it’s been a while since you posted this, but I have been toying with the idea of increasing air-to-air combat in a way that is very similar to what you have presented here.

I think the A2 D2-3 C6 Fighter is a very interesting idea. Having them target other air units before anything else is a simple and effective way to simulate that air-to-air combat. I also like how the combat values would now be the same in SBR (makes things simple).

I also really like how you altered Tactical Bombers to be A2-4 D3 C8. The two attack bonuses really give meaning to the importance to air supremacy.

I am curious to know how these two units have worked for you.

Thanks!

It evolves into this roster:
Baron’s HR units charts and set-up for 1941, 1942.2 and AA50
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36833.msg1469053#msg1469053

The main reason is because of too many combined arms and bonus for TcBs and Fgs.
Makes for longer combat round and more details to consider to get the correct bonus per combat round.
Since the point was about hitting directly other planes, I simplified the TcB special ability.
That way, combined arms is now reserved to ground units.
So, it is easier to focus on what is specific to Fg and TcB.
I always start combat rounds with preemptive AAA, then these two units (when present) fire, then all other units.
HTH.
Baron
Y

Grasshopper's Halifax Expansion

House Rules
• • • Young Grasshopper

6

0
Votes

6
Posts

934
Views

Y

@knp7765:

I like these new NOs, especially the one for China. So instead of extra cash, they get extra artillery for keeping the Burma Road open. I want to see this one work.

I thought you decided against removing the Japanese planes in Manchuria. Or is this something different?

It has been removed from Halifax core rules, these are my own additions… just wanted to chalange the Axis and if it’s too strong… I’ll put them back.

Ya… we never see China with artilley even if they have the road, this way we will see them more and it’s an additional $2.
S

Alternate Global Setup

House Rules
• • • Seven_Patch

6

0
Votes

6
Posts

1.4k
Views

S

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Seven_Patch:

Well the IPC value is even between both the Axis and the Allies (except the original global set up of 19 Allies Infantry), I’m hoping it doesn’t throw things off too much.

Glad you like it.

If they have equal ipc’s of units, allies win due to their greater economy

My changes to the additional Global setup pieces are equal so it would just add equal amount of IPC value to the base set up. I haven’t checked on what the balance is like for the base set up, I would imagine that the Axis have more units to allow the Axis a chance to try and win early while the Allies have to survive until their economic power tilts things back in their favor.

The Allies did win though, historically speaking :wink:

I give credit to the testers and designers of this game, a game of this size and scale can’t be easy to balance.
P

Variable NO's…An AA50 variant

House Rules
• • • Perry

1

0
Votes

1
Posts

744
Views

P

I got to say that the introduction of the National Objectives concept, was a stroke of genius imho.
Now, the game, through the NO Bonus Incentives, push the players towards their historical aims.

Anyhow, as with any setup, I think that even with the NO setup, AA50 might go stale over time.
Also, not ALL historical strategies are being encouraged by the OOB NOs. What about the German Sub strat, for example? It is not shown in any NOs at least.

Therefore, I thought of the Variable NO concept. It runs like this :

We create a list of, say, 5-10 NO’s per Nation (not possible to create even THAT many for a nation like China, for example). Before the game starts, every nation rolls randomly to see what NO’s they get.

1 NO: China
2 NO’s each: Italy and Soviet Union
3 NO’s each: Germany, Japan, UK and US

I like the thought of China having their own NO/NOs, but of course, they could be incorporated into the US one.

What’s your thought? Or maybe you got some NO’s of your own?
C

All IC's unlimited?

House Rules
• • • CanucKev

12

0
Votes

12
Posts

2.4k
Views

L

@theduke:

that sounds like 2nd or 3rd edition rules (i.e. “original” axis and allies), not 1st edition. are you sure? i’m taking about the very 1st edition… an edition basically no one plays anymore.

The 1st ed was w/ unlimited IC’s. Even ones you purchased.

Very unbalanced b/c GBR would get an IC for Persia, and move all of the India units to Sinkiang to allow US to buy the IC on the first round. Round 2 and beyond sees $ 60+/turn worth of allied armor pouring onto the Eurasia landmass to take everything over.

41

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts