• Customizer

    I could easily make a mod for this.  Obviously I’d want to follow what I mentioned are what I would do, but I am open to arguments against my ideas or for other ideas.

  • TripleA

    still would like to see bombers do 1d6 only. Bombers used to cost 15 and they were used back then, they went to 12 and were used still, now they are 12 with extra damage.

    would also like to see carriers go up to 18 cost. the amount of defense a carrier and 2 fighters brings to the table is absurd for the low cost. - this is the reason for all the mexican standoffs we see in the pacific, no one wants to showdown because defending is cheaper and you get to repair if you are at a naval base so the risk for the attacker is greater and so is the cost.

    global is a flop, because players want a more aggressive game. There are other games that are not aggressive in the war genre, those games sucked for a reason.

    Check it out, risk is a classic war game, because statistically attackers win so you can expect to see fireworks.

    A&A players still gravitate toward 50th even though they played the hell out of it already. why is that? Action. There is plenty of action in aa50 and it doesn’t take long to get to the main showdown which is japan attacking moscow and allies taking italy / berlin… if players don’t want to be aggressive they play for income and holding territories, but they still battle for it… primarily for national objectives.

    Global lacks incentive to have skirmishes in europe, but I am not sure what you can do about that.

  • Customizer

    I’d rather carriers got +1 attack and -1 defense (become 1/1 units) instead of up their cost.

    I would also like tactical bombers to go to 10 cost, since they are 3/3s that are only 4/3 under certain circumstances.

    I like bombers as they are.  With the bigger map, it is much tougher to get in range of the things you really want to bomb.  Plus, factory damage rules, (and tech for radar and improved factories) help to limit the effectiveness of bombers.

    One prime reason we see less attacking is that we now have 2 types of infantry (infantry and mech) which are both 1/2 units. 
    While artillery is still around, Tanks got increased to 6 cost, making them a luxury purchase that rarely happens.

    If you want to see more action, reduce tank cost to 5 and make them 3/2 units instead of 3/3.  (like classic)

  • TripleA

    You should bomb russia in our game veqryn, you grossly underestimate the impact. No, go for pacific victory.

    mmm I would like to see tanks cost 5 and russia’s production increased (from national objectives).


  • Increase the cost of Subs to 8 IPC, increase their attack value to 3 when no DD is present for defender.  Eliminate the autosink w/out DD present.

    Tech tokens

    Remove Tac unit pairing:  Tac attack @4 if defender has no Ftr present or if defender has Armor present.  This better reflects tank busting of a tactical bomber that was more focused on blowing stuff up on the ground than air to air combat.

    SBR (IC): Interceptors roll @2, Escorts roll @2, SBR aircraft roll @1, AA roll @1 per AA present (no innate IC AA).

    SBR (Naval): Interceptors (Ftr only) roll @2, Escorts (Ftr only) roll @2, SBR aircraft (Tac only) roll @1, CV roll @1.  All surviving Tac roll @3 to target (declared) any ship in the combat zone to exclude SS.

  • TripleA

    wow nerf subs…? it is hard enough for one player to attack another players naval as it is.

    catch 22 rules just add more rules to the game without adding any value to it.


  • ….get some f’ing nachos! Nachos rule!  :evil:

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    …take back the copyright of Axis and Allies from WoTC, and give it over to a fan based organization, before it’s too late.


  • @Veqryn:

    I’d rather carriers got +1 attack and -1 defense (become 1/1 units) instead of up their cost.

    I would also like tactical bombers to go to 10 cost, since they are 3/3s that are only 4/3 under certain circumstances.

    I like bombers as they are.  With the bigger map, it is much tougher to get in range of the things you really want to bomb.  Plus, factory damage rules, (and tech for radar and improved factories) help to limit the effectiveness of bombers.

    One prime reason we see less attacking is that we now have 2 types of infantry (infantry and mech) which are both 1/2 units. 
    While artillery is still around, Tanks got increased to 6 cost, making them a luxury purchase that rarely happens.

    If you want to see more action, reduce tank cost to 5 and make them 3/2 units instead of 3/3.  (like classic)

    I think part of it is the group you play with. The group I normally play in person with tends to be full of agressive but tactically sound players. We don’t turtle and if the people playing the Axis want a chance of victory they have to be very agressive. I still buy as many tanks as possible with Germany or Russia because even at 6 cost they are a good buy. Germany can still tank shock the hell out of Russia especially with Japan assisting. I have never seen(in our games) Russia get units into Africa. Especially not by transport. Axis players do their very best to sink the allied ships and a transport trying to reach Africa would be sunk by someones fighters. And frankly the way we play if Russia wants to pull units it needs to defend Russia and put them someplace else they can do so by all means. Just makes killing them that much easier. They are already hurting because Germany turn 1 should be able to make it impossible for the UK to land on their shore by taking their fleet out.

    Granted tech rolls and results can cause some weird changes. I have seen Japan run totally wild because they got shipyards for example, ditto with the USA, then once the USA is at war you are in battleship and carrier hell. One game we had the USA get shipyards and supersubs in the first two turns. Then we had the USA uboat fleet that annoyed the living hell out of Japan(because their fighters couldn’t sink the subs).

    Who wins often depends on who plays what nation and also on dice rolling.


  • Total rework of the convoy system.

    Players should have to control sea zones so their IPCs can flow to the capital safely.

    We need some battle of the Atlantic action.


  • @Axisplaya:

    @Alsch91:

    @Young:

    5. Allow US ships to maneuver within sea zone 121 while neutral.

    This is already possible.

    You sure of that ? I thought they were limited to sz101, 102 and 89 in the atlantic.

    Greenland has a USA symbol on it.  According to Alpha3 rules, US ships can end in any seazone next to US territory.  So 121 is eligible while USA is neutral.
    Not that it matters.  I see no reason to go there, even if you built a naval base there….


  • Man, you guys are sure increasing my dissatisfaction level with Global….  was just starting to get back into it now with the Alpha3 rules, too…  :cry:

    Lots of great points.  If I start thinking about what I would change with Global, I don’t know if I’d ever stop.

    Here are a couple to add to the mix:

    1.  Make 1941 and 1942 starting scenarios a la AA50
    2.  Cut down Japan, India, ANZ aircraft a bit more (he sure went nuts with P40) (of course, balancing it out however necessary)
    3.  Eliminate ANZ as a separate power - include them with UK Pacific - cut down on their airbases and naval bases, and remove the IC - maybe remove the VC.  Don’t know why he went so overboard with ANZ and there’s so little in Canada…  weird

    and many many more

    And yes, adding luck and die rolls to convoy raiding was completely unnecessary, and SBR at +2 seems like too much.  Maybe +1 or increase cost of Strat bombers.
    Liked the thoughts about tacs, carriers, etc.  You guys have a lot of really good ideas

  • TripleA

    well japan is supposed to take calcutta… the game is meant for japan to take that if he is playing for his japan NOs. If anzac is under uk pac… that is too many inf for calcutta what the hell is the point?

    If europe was broken down like finns were a country… europe might be cooler. yeah SBR on russia is the way to go… pretty lame imo. you only need 4-5 bombers to expect 20 damage instead of 5-6… huge difference.

  • TripleA '12

    @Gargantua:

    …take back the copyright of Axis and Allies from WoTC, and give it over to a fan based organization, before it’s too late.

    Or anyone else for that matter.


  • Cool topic. If I were Larry……

    I would take away the silly African safari and island hopping thing, making the Commi expansion NO only continental Europe and Mid East. Reduce it to 2 IPCs, but include pro allied neutrals too. I would make a lend lease NO for Russia through the Mid East as well. This would give both sides a reason to fight for the Mid East (axis get oil NO).

    3 IPCs for no axis war ships in sz80, and allied control of Persia, NW Per, & Caucasus (no allies on orig red tt).
    3 IPCs for the currant LL NO w/sz125 & Arc (no allies on orig red tt).

    I would do convoys at the beginning of the victims turn, then deducted in collect income. Still use dice, but at the units combat attack values w/subs getting two dice at 2’s (German subs roll 2 dice at 3’s). Each hit causes one damage to convoy (instead of adding up all dice).

    I would look at SBR (could use a tweak), but would realize that raising dice of intercepting & escorting ftrs to 2’s would probably promote even less SBR. I would know that it seems more realistic (felt that way too) w/ftrs on both sides firing at 2, and bmrs/tacs at 1, but it could also cause more air units to get shot down in the dog fight. More risk, less SBR?  Right now the defender can get overwhelmed, so wouldn’t send up interceptors. If he gets a higher roll w/def ftrs at 2, as the attacker you would probably have to commit more ftrs to keep him grounded.

    W/SBR I would consider raising the damage a minor IC & bases could take.

    A major IC cost 30 IPCs, and can take 20 damage (2/3’s of it cost). Minors & bases should be the same.

    Major IC cost 30 IPC takes 20 damage (2/3 cost) 20/30 = 66.6%
    Minor IC cost 12 IPC takes 8 damage (2/3 cost) 8/12 = 66.6%
    Bases cost 15 IPC take 10 damage (2/3 cost) 10/15 = 66.6%

    I would also consider lowering the cost of bases to 12 IPCs (like minor IC), because of the bases removed w/Alpha’s (would help both sides and promote more base building).

    Then it would be:
    Bases cost 12 IPC take 8 damage (2/3 cost) 8/12 = 66.6%

    I would also cap repairs for a naval base to a max of 3 ships (like scramble for an air base), and have damage of a base reduce its scramble/repairs ability just like damage lowers production of a minor IC.

    For minor IC and bases:
    1 damage to facility = 2 units produced/scrambled/repaired
    2 damage to facility = 1 unit produced/scrambled/repaired
    3 damage to facility = 0 units produced/scrambled/repaired (bases give no movement bonus)


  • Capping the repairs a port can make per turn would be HUGE in the pacific in my play group.

    We get to a point around the Caroline Islands when someone parks a huge fleet there and controls the port, and they can’t move onward because the enemy fleet is so big it will catch them and crush them, so it has to stay under the net of an AB and have a port to flip back over it’s 10 capital ships.

    If a point of damage was added to a port each time it makes a repair, id say that would be fair.


  • Hmm so it would basically cost you $1 to repair a battleship, or the naval base that repaired the battleship.

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    That’s the best -repair- concept I ever heard Oztea.

    Would work well with a house rule I just proposed…

  • TripleA

    I see lots of SBR on russia… but not on anyone else (germany has 2 majors and a minor in france so it is kinda pointless). the +2 damage is what wrecks russia, just make it 1d6.


  • Add a french tranny to zone 105.

    Now Germany would have the choice of either focus on France and royal navy and watch normandy be evacuated, or kill the tranny or attack normandy spreading his force.

    This is a actual choise Hitler had during the invation of France, so it be good from a historical point of view as well.
    It might make France somehow more exiting to play.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

37

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts