Mixing 'Mechs with A&A?

Update - Combined UK Commonwealth Nation Works great! Played it out and it seems to be balanced and it allows for greater viability as the Allies. US Rules - The 2 IPC’s taken off from buying a bomber in Western US works fine and allows for some historical accuracy The Free French These units now move with the Commonwealth and attack and defend along with them. Vichy France Now moves with Italy instead of its own turn NO’s The NO’s are now an optional addition and you can pick and choose which ones are played in your game Corrections SS/Red Guard/Rangers/Commandos should move 1 instead of 2. Canadian Sub starts in SZ 120 not 101 The Spain rule hasn’t come into play, as the German player has not been able to roll a 6, more on that later R&D works like a dream and creates new tactics for the powers Lend Lease Gives the Russian and UK Player a better chance against German and Italian Aggression - Works well

No, your comments are not in red!  You may have run afoul the “LIST” command (I did a lot, that’s why each blue line has it’s own start color and end color command.) For now, as I mentioned in the Delta thread, if you choose to test technologies, use the aforementioned rule that JimmyHat quoted, except, instead of using the technology descriptions use the following: TECH1:  Advanced Artillery + Improved Mechanized Infantry TECH2:  Jet Fighters + Long Range Aircraft TECH3:  Paratroopers + Heavy Bombers TECH4:  Improved Industrial Complexes + War Bonds TECH5:  Improved Shipyards + Super Submarines TECH6:  Radar + Rockets Technologies just like Larry’s rules without change.  The reduction to 6 and the combinations of which ones were already voted on.  It could change after we get testing back or have untested discussion, but at least it’s somewhere to start.    Note, IF YOU WANT TO TEST THEM, then you may. Report games and specific issues and counter strategies seen in the Delta thread (for now, I may move them to their own thread later.)  We’ll reconvene in a few weeks.

Guys, I don’t know how many folks here scan all the boards, but there is a fellow that formed a company called Field Marshall Games, FMG for short.  He is making accessories for A&A and is about to release new pieces for the A&A games.  The first release will be a complete set of Italian pieces.  The other nations will follow and I think this is going to be a great thing.  If you have time, check out this thread. http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=13894.0 It is already over 35 pages, so it will take a long time to read.  But the essence is he is about to take the next step and take pre-orders for the Italian pieces.  I bought a set of special dice from FMG and I am happy with them.  He is also selling a dice tower.  He plans to add other stuff.  I hope he gets plenty of support so he can fund the development of all his projects.  Take a look.  The set will include some new pieces which may help with your house rules.

True there are no victory conditions at all. Ultimately, one power will become the strongest amongst all. If a victory condition is really needed, it would be survive and defeat all other players. And also its correct that it will turn out to be an open-ended game will maybe double or triple game time of the original game. The reason this house rule is developed is that me and my friends often find ourself in the position of becoming dominating powers as Russia, Germany or the USA but still want to continue the game and expand our hard-built empire. At the end of the day, it is just a house rule that me and my friends loved and would like to share with other A&A lovers here.

@CWO: @Erocco: @Argothair: Some early thoughts on your mix of units: Many of your units are quite similar to each other mechanically, especially on land. E.g., a tank destroyer is C5 A4 D4 M2, whereas a light tank is C5 A5 D4 M2 – do you really need two different units whose statistics are within one point of each other? Another example is Mech. Inf. (C4 A2 D4 M2) vs. Armored Cars (C4 A3 D3 M2). With d12 dice, these small differences will only matter once every 12 rolls. Consider whether your players will want to buy extra minis, carefully squint at the setup, etc., so that they can enjoy the result of these small differences. I though of this long and hard. I love to have a choice of many different types of units for every situation. I own most of the HBG sculpts so I figured why not. Just a comment on a possible middle ground between two valid points: your valid point that having special extra units is fun and interesting, and Argothair’s point that having too many special units – some of them having only minor differences between them – complicates things excessively.  A possible way to split the difference is to have a rule saying that, out of the full range of available special extra units, each power is only allowed to buy X types per game (say, for example, 2 types).  This helps to keep things manageable, because each player only needs to remember the specifications for a very limited number of extra types, not for dozens of them.  It doesn’t restrict game-to-game variety because, from game to game, the various players won’t necessarily buy the same special units. An additional concept to consider would be to have certain types of special units only be available to certain powers, rather than to everyone.  This could result in interesting situations in which the opposing forces can never be precisely matched in composition…and it would also have a historical basis, because in WWII not all powers fielded every type of weapon. I should start posting some of the work completed to date because that’s exactly what I’ve done. Every Nation has 2 specific units with the exception of Italy which they have one (ideas for a second unit are welcome) and depending on the unit you can only build 1 or 2 per turn. So anything you suggesting CWO Marc has been implemented.

yea i added in planes as attackers but if non transports are in the sea zone, they must attack as normal as per OOB.

@knp7765: @Gamerman01: Not everyone agrees the Allies need a bid I agree with you. I don’t care for bids either. I think either side can win if played right with the setup as is. That being said, Grasshopper’s list is very interesting. I think you should spice things up though. Make ONE of the dice rolls end up in a $15 bid for the Axis. Perhaps an extra German tank in Poland, an extra Italian tank in Tobruk and an extra Japanese infantry in Kwangsi. The Allies still have a 5/6 chance of getting some padding for themselves. But now there is a 1/6 chance that the Allies will have to go without. lol that’s insane.  It would be radical enough to have a 1/6 chance that the Allies get no bid, but to give 15 to the Axis?  Most players would give up before playing if they rolled that.

Problem with halving it is that, then we have played, we have always gone KJF. Japan becomes far too strong in two turns. The US’s income is needed to counter this. I believe the Western US would need a bonus of 40 to compete. It is possible if you played Europe alone, the Allies should be ok with the IPCs on the board. Try it and tell us your thoughts. I do like the 42 set up, as it more realistic historically.