Using Pacific/Europe Pieces with original board.

During an interview with Larry Harris we did a few months ago, I mentioned house rules for A&A centered around Espionage. We got a ton of feedback about it. So, now that we have completed the complete series on Air Combat and Sea Combat, we decided to double back to make a video about possible set of house rules that center around the concepts of spycraft.

We worked with our friend Jonathan Bosch to develop a few fun options. We aren’t claiming these are 100% flushed out, but our hope is that folks will give them a try and have some fun with them. Let us know what you think in the comments and if you would like to see more videos like this one!

Enjoy!

https://youtu.be/6MaDGKjVbDI

Thank You for reply.

Well then technically you shouldn’t get to transport your allies on ships neither but it is a rule in game play. I can see still using allies paratroopers for game play and I would even have a rule where a dice roll blocks it or stops it on that turn based on higher command.

Thanks Marc. Always love your replies !

IMO, it’s not great UI to hide it down there. :wink:

One issue I saw with the above.
It doesn’t create an incentive to go against Sydney.
San Francisco or Calcutta is always a better choice to help the Axis wins.
It is the exact opposite of my previous posts about providing some special Japanese Victory conditions which includes taking Australia.

This can be solved somehow  by giving 1 VC point to Calcutta and 2 VC points to Sydney.
So this method have an impact on Axis goal in Pacific, it allows to choose where you put the incentive.

I for one hate the notion of zero IPC territories altogether. Regardless of where they are on the map.

I would be in favor of doubling the value of all territories, making 0 IPC tts worth 1

Right now most nations income is much inferior to their production capabilities, ICs are sometimes a rare purchase

Doubling the IPC values of all territories would swap this, nations would have insufficient factories to start the game, and would likely purchase additional ICs and/or upgrade the ones they star with
You would obviously have much more units on the board, but this I believe would lead to less board space being ignored for large portions of the game
Battles would also average out better with regards to dice rolling

Just giving a possible solution and arguments for it :)
It may be a terrible one, but it’s more feasible for F2F games with marking all over the map

I believe this thread below maybe looking for some ideas here and concept such as “double dipping”.
So I bumped it to reactive this TT income bonus thread.
Re: House rule proposal
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38261.msg1563914#msg1563914

Agreed. When the experienced player took axis it was over quickly, but the second game the experienced player took allies and it became a much longer game. I will give this a go again soon.

If anyone attempts this please post your thoughts on balancing the board.

I wanted to find a good houserule to link AAP and AAE together so I thought since I own AAR as well I could use that as a third map to link them together. Anytime I wanted to move troops from AAE to AAP or vice versa I could use AAR. I wouldn’t count the IPC Value of the land represented in the world map. Has anyone else tried this because I think it could work well.