G40 League House Rule project

[Soulblighter]

I know that the reason for the middle east NO’s is mostly historical accuracy. However. It makes no sense that when Japan captures the middle east, the axis gains less from it. A suggestion would be to change the NO’s so that Germany and Italy each get 1 ipc for each Axis controlled TT (Iraq, Persia, Northwest Persia). This is the same for Caucasus. It doesn’t matter which Axis power controls it, as long as it is controlled by the Axis.

[gamerman01]

@Soulblighter:

I know that the reason for the middle east NO’s is mostly historical accuracy. However. It makes no sense that when Japan captures the middle east, the axis gains less from it.

Totally agree.

A suggestion would be to change the NO’s so that Germany and Italy each get 1 ipc for each Axis controlled TT (Iraq, Persia, Northwest Persia).

I’m going to raise that bet and delete the Iraq, Persia, and Northwest Persia NO’s altogether for Germany and Italy.  I think a big flaw in the game is that Germany has the option of just going south and raking in all kinds of cash if she can’t handle Russia.  I just don’t think their income should go up by 10 immediately upon taking the middle east.

This is the same for Caucasus. It doesn’t matter which Axis power controls it, as long as it is controlled by the Axis.

That is already the rule.

On this topic, though, I think Germany should get the NO for Russian VC’s even if Italy takes.  From what I’ve seen in various war documentaries, Italy was impotent.  But Germany basically took control of Italy’s responsibilities (defending Italy and going to North Africa).  I like that A&A gives you a potent Italy as a second Axis European power, but really in my mind it is just simulating the overall German war machine and giving them a valuable can opening ability.  I could explain it better, but basically I’m saying that there was no significant Italian army on the Russian front, and therefore in A&A terms I think Germany should still get the NO for Russian VC’s in the event that Italy takes control of them.  But not Japan.

[gamerman01]

Also, while considering the middle east, I think it is bogus that industrial complexes can be erected there.  By anyone.  I’m going to disallow them, and will keep thinking about IC’s… Maybe a rule that you can’t build one on any territory that was not originally controlled.  Haven’t thought this one through yet - I’ll throw it out there for you guys to comment on.

[gamerman01]

So Japan can still build IC’s in China, but not Hong Kong or Malaya
No majors may be built.  Only minors.
Germany can build in Romania, Holland, Poland, or Norway, but not Finland or Yugoslavia, for example.
UK can still build one in Egypt

Come to think of it, wasn’t there an alternate rule back in the original A&A game that you couldn’t build any new complexes?  To handicap the Allies?

[JuanSpain]

I think you should be able to build everything, everywhere. There should be other alternatives to make the game even if it is not now.

[gamerman01]

I didn’t mean anything about G40 game balance - I was just recalling that there was actually an optional rule for no new IC’s in the old game.

I am going for a bit more historical accuracy - it is ludicrous that IC’s could be built in Persia or Iraq, for example.

[JuanSpain]

@Gamerman01:

So Japan can still build IC’s in China, but not Hong Kong or Malaya
No majors may be built.  Only minors.
Germany can build in Romania, Holland, Poland, or Norway, but not Finland or Yugoslavia, for example.
UK can still build one in Egypt

Come to think of it, wasn’t there an alternate rule back in the original A&A game that you couldn’t build any new complexes?  To handicap the Allies?

You are right, it was part of a 3 rule set oriented to weight a victory for the Axis, I just checked the original rule book I have at home.
What you propose sounds interesting, it is dificult to know if rules are good until you play a lot, so let´s try and see what happens.

[gamerman01]

Yeah, that’s what I’m thinking.  I’m changing so many things at once I don’t know how it’s going to turn out, but it will be fun to playtest it.  We’re getting there, especially since we have barney helping us now.

[gamerman01]

I need to post the link to the spreadsheet from time to time, since this thread was originally for my rankings… so it’s not on the first post
Anyway, here it is https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ujxn3r0e5sekcVPS8CbkH3KByB1iVrNJimiwA3e_BiI/edit#gid=2

[Soulblighter]

Almost a year since the last development.

[gamerman01]

It’s going to happen.  I’m not in a hurry - I’m still enjoying the horribly flawed  :wink: 2nd edition game.  And my PS3.  And PS2.  And Nintendo emulator.  And movies.  And sports.  And my family.  And sleep

[gamerman01]

I will be playing balanced mod 2.0 pretty much exclusively for awhile.  My version is on the back burner, but is still a very real possibility down the road.  I am continuing to get ideas, and the balanced mod will have some influence.  I don’t know if interest in the balanced mod will ever cool off, but if it does, I will turn my attention back to my own project