Scuttle Rights/Scorched Earth

I wonder what the difference is in :
Battles fought in Winter / Casualties    - VS -    Battles fought in Summer / Casualties

Cheers,
Starlight Sniper

Other than Russia transporting factories east to the Urals before the Germans reached them, I find it hard to accept any factory being used (by anyone) after it’s tt has been captured in combat. Therefore, simply remove them and give the captor a cash bonus for acquired assets. Or allow them to build (in their own home factories) any new tech units the enemy had developed.

I think you got it….
In fact not remove it but give the captor a cash…
For minor factory give the value of the territory in cash.
For major factory give x 2 the value of the territory in cash.

Even a liberated France “building” anything other than infantry in Paris is unhistorical
I totally agree….

The value in this is for people who might want to get info for 1939 scenario to determine rules for American entry.

From fortune magazine:

Hmmm, an interesting set of ideas.  I am planning to do the same, using the original Pacific and European games for my summer history class and historical gaming class.  I have some home rules for Pacific that I use, where I have increased the game to 6 players: the US, British India, Australia, the Netherlands East Indies, China, and Japan.  For the European Game, I am planning to add Italy, using the pieces from the Anniversary edition.  There will be theater commanders for the US and the UK in Europe and the Pacific, and a separate commander for Australia.

I do have rules for Lend-Lease, and also Lend-Lease certificates that I use.  I have modified the rules a bit for aircraft and shore bombardment, and Japanese Infantry are a bit harder to kill.  When I add Italy, it will have the option of changing sides during the game, or even staying neutral.  It does mean reworking the IPC for the Europe game, but such is life.  Should be interesting when it is finished.  I am also writing a combined rules set for the game.

I really like the Pro-Axis Argentinian rule.  It would be almost impossible to activate it. But still…

South America is such a large portion of the board with so many Military and Historical “what ifs”.  Sad to leave it without this interesting possibility.

I remember right after AAR came out, almost five years ago, playing a game of AAE with tanks that defend on 3. It was horrible, horrible idea. Germany just got too much out of that one. But reduced prices on fighters and carriers didn’t seem to break the game as much. Germany builds lots of fighters, but so do the UK and US. Nobody builds carriers in AAE unless something unusual has happened anyway.

At any rate for both AAE and AAP besides the reduced price on fighters and carriers to match AAR (and 24 VPs for AAP) my group plays with the rules as is. Transports are any land or one tank, tanks defend on 2, etc.
But now with AA50 there’s a lot of change. The problem with wholesale just changing the unit stats is that setups were designed for the original stats.

So I have a few questions:
Do you think fighters that cost 10 and carriers at 16 ruins or damages gameplay in either AAE or AAP? Especially considering escorts for SBRs it might be a concern.

Any consider going through and tweaking the setups for E and P to make them fair for the new unit stats? It might do good to freshen them up a bit. I think if well done it could further enhance the Pacfic especially. Convoy values, of course, are a concern.

What about tweaking setups to Europe to add Italy? Without Sub-Saharan Africa this might be pointless, but maybe the oil money alone would be enough.

+2 defense modifier? Id rather have each unit take 2 hits to kill ( but you must allocate a HIT unit first if their is one before you select a SECOND hit unit)

how bout that?

@UKcommander:

Thanks for clearing that up for me GG :D :D :D .

shoye no prob…