Territory Income Bonus: for Classic, Revised, 1941/42.2 etc

  • '17 '16

    Hi Black Elk,
    If you ever played your Territory Income Bonus in a 1942.2 setting,
    have you ever tried to introduce a kind of sub on patrol against merchant marines?
    As it is inside G40. There is probably some SZ that can be identify as vulnerable sea-lines.

    It could be a way to reduce the total amount of IPCs via Subs and warships presence (in addition to STrB raid).

    So, it could be as simple as:
    at the beginning of the player’s turn,
    each territory worth 1 IPC but
    for each enemy Subs in the ocean near IC (up to 2 SZ away) you substract 2 IPCs and
    substract 1 IPC for each warship and plane on a carrier, but not for the carrier.

    What do you think of this addition?

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    I think the territory income bonus could easily support HRs for submarines. I have always found subs to be rather complicated and somewhat underpowered in A&A. On the old boards my HR for subs doing economic damage was pretty simple. Any submarine may elect to do economic damage on factories in range of a sea zone (2 spaces), but most forego movement to run the attack. The defending factory hits at a 1, to destroy the submarine immediately, same as sbr. Otherwise the sub does a run on the Nations shipping at a cost of 1d6 at the factory being attacked.

    Subs are cheaper now than before, so it might make sense if the factory hit on a 2 instead of a 1. But I like doing it that way for ease of use. Basically having them work like bombers do. SBR in this case can stand for Submarine Battle Run, or “Submarine Blockade & Raid”, or something like that :)

    In the old games income was removed directly, but in the newer games I would just keep it the same as sbr mechanics for simplicity. Or you could try other ways to implement them, but I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t work with the T.I. Bonus. I’m not sure if the OOB game in 1942.2 would support subs doing economic damage without some kind of boost to overall income. I can imagine UK getting strangled early, or Germany getting strangled late:) But with the bonus at least you’d have more money to buy both subs and destroyers (to kill enemy subs before their economic damage got too insane). It would be an incentive for the purchase of ships, especially destroyers to counter.

    The 1942.2 setting is I think the optimal one for the income bonus.
    I like it with the option +1 ipcs for each Victory City controlled at the start of the turn.

    In case anyone is curious with the VC rule added the numbers look roughly like this in 42.2 for the opening round

    Russia +2
    G+4
    UK+2
    J+3
    USA+3

    It is also possible to give the VC bonus separately, instead of the T.I. bonus, in which case I like it at +2 ipcs (or you could do 2 ipcs with the T.I. Bonus as well, making the territory worth a total of 3 ipcs if you include the normal T.I. bonus, 1 for the territory 2 for the city.) I see lots of different ways such rules can be used

  • '17 '16

    I believe this thread below maybe looking for some ideas here and concept such as “double dipping”.
    So I bumped it to reactive this TT income bonus thread.
    Re: House rule proposal
    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38261.msg1563914#msg1563914

Suggested Topics

  • 8
  • 1
  • 6
  • 11
  • 10
  • 5
  • 2
  • 5
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

40

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts