This is what we do in game. Each neutral has a territory value and some kind of army and a few ships. You can attack them if you want. But u need to capture each neutral territory to get icp income.
If you lose battle then just that lone neutral joins other side.
But we also have a cost to try and influence a strict neutral to your side and you receive the territory value towards income and what is there for the ground troops and a possible ship. Nothing stronger than a Destroyer.
Not all countries can influence the same neutrals. We roll a d20 and a 4 or less u get neutral.
This is just an idea u may look at.
Spain and Turkey have the biggest Amy but cost more for those 2 to try and get.
More practical rule change
-
USA start with 2 extra armor 2 inf 1 arty. Panama. When the war kicks off they can take south america sooner. That should balance the game out more / get it moving along sooner.
After all the gimps and nerfs to USA’s income and naval, may as well boost em on land to get them fighting sooner.
-
@Cow:
USA start with 2 extra armor 2 inf 1 arty. Panama. When the war kicks off they can take south america sooner. That should balance the game out more / get it moving along sooner.
After all the gimps and nerfs to USA’s income and naval, may as well boost em on land to get them fighting sooner.
Not sure that giving the allies more units can be called balancing, when it’s the axis that need a little boost.
-
Balance Alpha 3:
Give British Fighters over England the ability to defend at 5 or less. No new units on the board, no increased attacking strength. If the fighters leave England (or are on carriers, or scrambled over fleets, even if scrambled from England!) they don’t defend at 5, they defend at 4. This only effects BRITISH FIGHTERS if they are ON ENGLAND when attacked.
We’ve done this a few times, it’s enough that Germany’s Sea Lion goes from 98% odds to 72% odds and inflicts a lot more casualties as well, meaning Germany has less chance to push the Russians back out after taking down England (they can still do it, just takes another round usually, and if you don’t think that’s a lot, imagine the increased Russian cash for another round!)
-
@Cmdr:
Balance Alpha 3:
Give British Fighters over England the ability to defend at 5 or less. No new units on the board, no increased attacking strength. If the fighters leave England (or are on carriers, or scrambled over fleets, even if scrambled from England!) they don’t defend at 5, they defend at 4. This only effects BRITISH FIGHTERS if they are ON ENGLAND when attacked.
We’ve done this a few times, it’s enough that Germany’s Sea Lion goes from 98% odds to 72% odds and inflicts a lot more casualties as well, meaning Germany has less chance to push the Russians back out after taking down England (they can still do it, just takes another round usually, and if you don’t think that’s a lot, imagine the increased Russian cash for another round!)
Not a bad idea at all. I like it!
-
What if the British Fighters on England SCRAMBLE? Baloon pops
-
What if the British Fighters on England SCRAMBLE? Baloon pops
You could have read what was written and notice they lost that ability in all battles that did not take place directly over England (the capitol). So scrambled fighters would lose that ability until going back to England itself. The rule would literally only effect Sea Lion, and we’re finding it to be quite a small change that has a pretty good impact so far.
We went from 9/11 Sea Lion wins to 2/4 Sea Lion wins (number of wins/number of games). It’s not as “large” a sample size as 11 games, but it’s much closer to even now.
-
Aye BUT a battle in a seazone around England, IS a battle over England according to the rules! :D
I like the concept Jen, I’m just giving you a hard time.
-
Aye BUT a battle in a seazone around England, IS a battle over England according to the rules! :D
I like the concept Jen, I’m just giving you a hard time.
Yes I see that. I specifically excluded it from the rules - and yer the reason I burned one of my manuals to dust!
Suggested Topics
