Fair enough! And thanks very much for the writeup. If anyone tries this again, consider adding:
2 German subs in SZ 10 (Greenland)
2 German subs in SZ 12 (west of Morocco)
1 Japanese carrier with 1 Japanese fighter in SZ 62 (east of Tokyo)
AARHE: Phase 3: Revised NA's
-
Sure. All the current NA’s are on pg 1 right?
-
no ill post what we got… you will have to decide what works best under playtest conditions. ill post.
-
no ill post what we got… you will have to decide what works best under playtest conditions. ill post.
check this section:
-
I’ll save it on Microsoft Word and edit as necessary. Commonwealth Divisions is included right
-
Were any American troops actually fighting in China?
With Chinese Division NA we might need to remove the 2 US VCs in China…
At the moment we have 2 US VCs in China to model persuading one of the many Chinese divisions to do something.
-
Were any American troops actually fighting in China?
flying tigers thats it… no land forces
With Chinese Division NA we might need to remove the 2 US VCs in China…
++++ have to look into this
At the moment we have 2 US VCs in China to model persuading one of the many Chinese divisions to do something.
+++ perhaps china needs to be more independant rather than tied to US VC conditions. not sure
-
@Imperious:
+++ perhaps china needs to be more independant rather than tied to US VC conditions. not sure
well we don’t do map changes
so its just a matter of removing the VC if anythingI don’t want China to be a new player if thats what you meant
I am actually not too keen on Italy being a separate player either but its ok its just among the optional rules -
@Imperious:
+++ perhaps china needs to be more independant rather than tied to US VC conditions. not sure
I’m with the idea of making China an independent power in the optional rules. Chiang Kai-Shek wasn’t really pro-American, he just wanted Western military aid and precious Lend-Lease supplies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiang_Kai_Shek#Wartime_leader_of_China).
nyway if you guys aren’t tired of this project yet we could create NA’s for China. Tekkyy whadya think?
-
China can be independant but controlled by USA… it should have its own builds and money and most likely 2 IPC infantry which can be summarized into a new Chinese list of NA’s . this list will cost the USA player from his allotment of NA’s for China. What you think?
-
yeah this is tough without complicated rules
for one, Chinese forces are not gonna help US conquer Germany lol so forces raised there shouldn’t be able to move too far away from China
-
Well, Chinese should only be able to battle Japanese forces. The only exception is when the Japanese are on original Russian territories. So basically, the Chinese can only do battle on the Pacific coast and can’t run around and battle everyone they want.
-
As for NA’s for china, they should get very few, and not that powerful ones.
Let me do a little research and I will come up with some.
-
Hitler sent ‘lesser’ people to labour camps, and the Russians (if memory serves) did the same to captured German units. Perhaps there’s a way to add this into the game?
I.E. For every five German Infantry Russia destroys, add one IPC to your national reserves.
Once per turn a German infantry, instead of participating in combat, can deport citizens of their current country to labour camps. This adds 1 IPC to your reserves Note: You may only deport three times from the same territory. - The deportations could also be added to the NVC. -
I think they should be unrestricted… What “US” player in his/her right mind would try to spend all the logistical time of creation and transport to fight an enemy on the opposite side of the world when 24/7 his hands are full in China? Think K-I-S-S, and I am not even that good with the rule… But this is what we strive for…
GG
-
Well, Chinese should only be able to battle Japanese forces. The only exception is when the Japanese are on original Russian territories. So basically, the Chinese can only do battle on the Pacific coast and can’t run around and battle everyone they want.
yes the Chinese should only be able to protect their own nation of greater china which includes Japanese held manchuria and kwangtung. You can even stretch this to include french indo china but it would not be as good as the first two.
-
I.E. For every five German Infantry Russia destroys, add one IPC to your national reserves.
Once per turn a German infantry, instead of participating in combat, can deport citizens of their current country to labour camps. This adds 1 IPC to your reserves Note: You may only deport three times from the same territory. - The deportations could also be added to the NVC.Yeah we could try something like that.
Some time able we came up with this rule about capturing retreating infantry. The details are in the latest draft.
At the moment these units are just removed/destroyed.
We could make it for Russia and Germany (or even Japan) for every X enemy units captured gives 1 IPC. -
Well, if 1 side retreats, than x amount of units must stay behind, once this territory is liberated, the units kept as prisoners are freed and may do battle or non-coms on the next turn. How does this sound, just throwing things from the top of my head.
-
I thought POWs were removed from the frontline to labour camps for fear of the enmy doing just that?
-
No POW’s, too much to keep track of! Add IPC’s if anything…
-
yeah don’t want to don’t keep track of too many things
but could 1 captured INF giving 1 IPC be too much?
I mean INF costs as little as 2 IPC in our rules
Suggested Topics
