Im looking forward to trying this out. Great thoughts and implementation YG!!!
@Baron:
- Naval supremacy
There are no Axis Capital ships on the boardEasy to prevent this to happen in a gamey way for Axis. Just built one BB or Carrier at the last moment.
Maybe, it should be about naval presence in a specific Ocean.
Example: no Axis naval Units in South or North Atlantic.
For Asian side, it could be about Axis presence in Indian Ocean.
IDK.
Could make it that he ship cant be next to an industrial complex
Naval Supremacy is a difficult objective to gain for sure, but not impossible. Remember, the token is awarded as soon as the objective is achieved, therefore… once the Allies destroy the last Axis capital ship on the board, they will immediately receive the victory token, it might be too late for Japan to get a Battleship on the board. I was trying to reward the Allies if they spend a lot of resources on the sea, but I also wanted to keep the objective simple. IDK.
@Young:
Naval Supremacy is a difficult objective to gain for sure, but not impossible. Remember, the token is awarded as soon as the objective is achieved, therefore… once the Allies destroy the last Axis capital ship on the board, they will immediately receive the victory token, it might be too late for Japan to get a Battleship on the board. I was trying to reward the Allies if they spend a lot of resources on the sea, but I also wanted to keep the objective simple. IDK.
Right, the token is awarded on completion. Its not about retaining the supremacy. These are a perfect start, but to me, perfect altogether. Again, great work YG. Well thought out!!!
@Young:
Naval Supremacy is a difficult objective to gain for sure, but not impossible. Remember, the token is awarded as soon as the objective is achieved, therefore… once the Allies destroy the last Axis capital ship on the board, they will immediately receive the victory token, it might be too late for Japan to get a Battleship on the board. I was trying to reward the Allies if they spend a lot of resources on the sea, but I also wanted to keep the objective simple. IDK.
Nonetheless, I would probably split it in half according to the 2 maps.
It will increase the possibility of reaching one target and not the other for Allies.
It can be a total annihilation of German’s and Italy’s fleet in Europe Map.
And
No Axis Capital Warships on Pacific Map.
It is up to you.
Very well done YG, these add even more historical flavor to the game.
@Young:
Victory Objectives & Victory Tokens
As soon as a victory objective is achieved, a victory token will be awarded. The side with the most victory tokens at the end of the day wins the game. Here is a list of the available victory objectives for each side, remember, the objective need only be achieved, and not held in order to receive a token.
Axis Powers
Washington
The Axis control WashingtonLondon
The Axis control LondonMoscow
The Axis control MoscowCalcutta
The Axis control CalcuttaSydney
The Axis control Sydney- North Africa
The Axis control Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Tobruk, Alexandria, and Egypt.
- China
The Axis control all Chinese original territories- San Francisco
The Axis have at least 1 warship in sea zone 10
Economic supremacy
The Axis have a collective total of 140 IPCs on the income tracker
Allied PowersBerlin
The Allies control BerlinRome
The Allies control RomeTokyo
The Allies control TokyoParis liberation
The Allies have liberated Paris- Africa
There are no Axis land units on the continent of Africa
- Philippines liberation
The Allies have liberated the Philippines- Strategic Bombing Campaign
The Allies have delivered maximum damage to the Major IC on either Berlin or Tokyo
- China liberation
The Allies have liberated all Chinese original territories- Naval supremacy
There are no Axis Capital ships on the board
You probably need some cards to remind during the game to all players the less obvious objectives.
I bolded the one I feel less obvious which probably need player’s help and more emphasis.
Both sides have to keep in mind the other side objectives, when planing strategy, they are not all as simple as:
- China
The Axis control all Chinese original territories
against- China liberation
The Allies have liberated all Chinese original territories
Very well done YG, these add even more historical flavor to the game.
Thanks GV, the “historical flavor” would definitely be another + to using this house rule.
Thanks BM, I agree about the cards… I would like to hold off from printing my new national objective card deck if it means that I can add cards for these victory objectives. A list of all victory objectives for each side would need to be available for each player, the idea of blocking enemy objectives will no doubt be part of overall strategy conversations. When I think about how teammates will strategize and plot to get these objectives, I get excited for all the posibilities. What if both the Axis and Allied powers plan to go for their African objectives? every decision is secret, so there should be an aura of suspicion in the room for tomorrow’s game. Also, I find with this rule, the Axis will go for the same old strategies, but it’s now fun to play the Allies going after clear goals.
BTW, I’m thinking about changing naval suremacy to read: there are no Japanese capital ships on the board.
My only worry is that the clear choice for the US would be to operate solely in the Pacific, where I prefer the level of involvment on each side to be a tougher choice.
more to follow…
Good Action YG!
It’s definitely a lot of fun creating new ways to play the game!
split it in half? 0.5 for each board? or make every objective worth 2 and you can split up objectives that include both boards to equal 1 token for each board. Thoughts? I think it does because it keeps the US from focusing on Japan for a token while leaving Germany free to build theirs. I know i like them carriers and the odd Battleship for Germany.
split it in half? 0.5 for each board? or make every objective worth 2 and you can split up objectives that include both boards to equal 1 token for each board. Thoughts? I think it does because it keeps the US from focusing on Japan for a token while leaving Germany free to build theirs. I know i like them carriers and the odd Battleship for Germany.
I don’t think I wan’t to give multiple points or less points depending on the objective. I would rather keep it at 1 point for every objective and possibly add 2 more objectives making it 10 total per side.
Axis
The Axis powers have made 3 successful convoy disruptions from 3 separate convoy zones within the same game round
Allies
There are no Italian or German warships on the board
I like that, gonna modify the list now.
Good Action YG!
It’s definitely a lot of fun creating new ways to play the game!
Thanks Barney, I’m very excited about this development.
Finally! A system to determine victory that the people in my playgroup would get behind.
My suggestion, keep it simple. 1 token per Victory Objective. It’s just less complicated to score, compare hockey or soccer, to a game like basketball.
The current VC system seems busted and this could be a really solid alternative. The best thing it has going for it is that one line about whoever has more “at the end of the night.”
That is what’s needed. No sudden death. No TKO. No autocall. No need to play for 4 days.
This is what my players want I think. A simple way to determine the Victor in a single session.
A simple point system. Genius
My other suggestion, whatever the number of tokens, it should just be addition, not subtraction. You get points/tokens for your side. You don’t take em away from the enemy, or steal them. This is again for simplicty.
Two piles or stacks of tokens. A pile for each side. Without a bunch of chips changing hands all the time. Just straight forward, positive ways to win.
I really like it. The number of total objectives or specific objectives, doesn’t matter so much to me as the general concept. Since this could be used for all A&A boards, and not just G40.
Well done dude :-D
Ps. You could maybe print an objectives score card, on a 8.5x11 sheet of paper, like with columns. Then make a hash or an X in pencil, like if you were playing cricket in darts or scoring any game like that. Or laminate it and use actual tokens. something like that would be more practical for me than individual objectives printed at the playing card size. But of course I’m down for decks as well. Also, again if this works for G40, could work for the other games too like 42.2 especially, which also has a somewhat busted VC win problem of the same sort G40 has currently. Victory Tokens could give a better way to call the game, or resolve it at the players pace.
They can choose a total number of points, or a time to call it, and just go by that, instead of trying to puzzle out who has “the edge” at the end of the night. Or forcing continuations, concessions, or undecided matches, because of the oob VC system falling short. Tokens just seem like a novel alternative. I would like to try it out
Thank you for your support Black Elk, i’m excited for tomorrow’s game when we try it for the first time. What do you think of the entire list of Global victory objectives at this point? would you be able to create the victory objectives list for 42.5? I never play that game but I’m sure it must have the same victory condition problem like you said.
Ps. You could maybe print an objectives score card, on a 8.5x11 sheet of paper, like with columns. Then make a hash or an X in pencil, like if you were playing cricket in darts or scoring any game like that. Or laminate it and use actual tokens.
I agree, I’m gonna design a chart to track them rather than the card deck idea, or maybe I’ll do both… IDK
They can choose a total number of points, or a time to call it, and just go by that, instead of trying to puzzle out who has “the edge” at the end of the night. Or forcing continuations, concessions, or undecided matches, because of the oob VC system falling short. Tokens just seem like a novel alternative. I would like to try it out
Sounds like the last hour of our gatherings for sure.
Right now everything listed works for 1942.2 and AA50 and older games. How easy some of them are to achieve might be debatable. The objective to take Washington for example, is fairly impossible on any board. But seems like it’s worth having just for completeness. I’m not sure there is necessarily a hard limit to the number of potential objectives/tokens, probably the question becomes whether one side or the other can consistently get more tokens in the average session time. If that proves the case, then I would just add more potential conditions over time. Proof of concept, and if it works go from there.
Modifications made today due to our playtest…
My only problem…
When do the tokens get counted?
For example, it is likely the Axis will have more tokens in round 4, 5, and 6 than the allies. Even though they momentum may have shifted to the allies.
How do you take that into account? And then the obvious, Japan or Germany move to get 1 or 2 more points, and then say GAME because they have more tokens, without the opportunity for the allies to respond.
My only problem…
When do the tokens get counted?
For example, it is likely the Axis will have more tokens in round 4, 5, and 6 than the allies. Even though they momentum may have shifted to the allies.
How do you take that into account? And then the obvious, Japan or Germany move to get 1 or 2 more points, and then say GAME because they have more tokens, without the opportunity for the allies to respond.
That’s a good question G, and one that I don’t think I can answer completely because…
1. Some players play without a time frame, you know… the young cats that play until the sun comes up, or when they’re just too drunk and tired to go on.
2. Some players have the space and ability to keep their games setup over long periods of time, they’re the ones that can truly get a surrender from their opponent on day 3 or 4.
3. Some players can’t leave the game setup, so they start early in the morning and would be lucky to finish 10 rounds before they have to get home to their wife and kids.
The 3rd explanation is more like us, and we only had one play test so far. In that game it took 6 rounds before a token was awarded and it ended up being the only one gained. I have taken a hard stand on this victory condition stuff because quite frankly, I’m sick of all the bickering between players trying to agree on who won the game, so I’m going with this system wether they like it or not. In time I’m sure they will learn how to go after tokens while trying to prevent the enemy from getting theirs, but I’ve made it clear that the only thing that matters at the Bunker from now on is how many tokens your side has at the end of the day, and if you don’t want to lose… better call the wife and kids and tell them you’re not coming home.
I guess if something had to be writen in stone, I would say the side with the most tokens at the end of round 9 wins the game when games can’t continue past 1 day, and adjusted to the end of round 15 for games that can be continued past 1 day.
If you drive out to Fredericton in May we can play test this face to face. :)
