• The effect of the A-bomb could be to permanently at 1 VC to the enemy and destroy all production capabilities ( no more IPC from the area) you can’t build a factory and any factory is destroyed.

    Literally this is not a true effect of the A-bomb, but in terms of how it effects a nation in the larger scope of things would model it quite well.

  • Customizer

    @Imperious:

    The effect of the A-bomb could be to permanently at 1 VC to the enemy and destroy all production capabilities ( no more IPC from the area) you can’t build a factory and any factory is destroyed.

    Literally this is not a true effect of the A-bomb, but in terms of how it effects a nation in the larger scope of things would model it quite well.

    I like this idea; however, instead of destroying the factory, I would just add <large number=“” here=“”>D6’s to the facility, so that it is extremely costly to repair it.

    Definitely like the VC idea though.</large>

  • Sponsor

    @ossel:

    @Imperious:

    The effect of the A-bomb could be to permanently at 1 VC to the enemy and destroy all production capabilities ( no more IPC from the area) you can’t build a factory and any factory is destroyed.

    Literally this is not a true effect of the A-bomb, but in terms of how it effects a nation in the larger scope of things would model it quite well.

    I like this idea; however, instead of destroying the factory, I would just add <large number=“” here=“”>D6’s to the facility, so that it is extremely costly to repair it.

    Definitely like the VC idea though.</large>

    I like the idea of an A-bomb taking a Victory City away from the enemy, but I would also complement it with my idea of putting all the facilities on the target territory at max damage, or zeroing the territories IPC value.


  • After looking at heavy bombers again, I’m swaying back to having no defense against the A-bomb, even though it may have been possible. The reasoning is that the A-bomb should be something REALLY good to have. As heavy bombers can be used over and over, it’s really better financially to just use them. Unless you can drop a nuke with no risk of failure or bomber loss - that makes nukes better.


  • So you need heavy bombers tech before you can transport the bomb correct? You should only be able to drop the bomb on a victory city with limited restrictions. I think its too strong and only the US had it. If your Germany and your winning the game on your side and then Russia gets A-bomb and takes the territory of Germany ( Berlin) out of play with no value and no factory to produce pieces will change game way to much. Unless your Russia and all you have is Moscow left maybe. You could make getting heavybombers tech way later in rounds. But if you need to spice up your games so be it.


  • To drop the bomb you needed to be at high altitude or the plane might get caught in the blast, so flak will be out of range.

    So effects, permanently lose 1 VC, and Add one to side that dropped the bomb.

    Heavy Bomber tech required and cost in 15IPC and only one per turn can be made.

    One or Two D6 reduces IPC (permanent) of area.


  • Well that’s what i mean but didn’t state. One side has to win by one extra VC, the other gets one VC even if the area is controlled by original player.


  • The Atomic bomb was in WWII - this is a WWII game. How is it useless? I’d say your comment is what is useless.

    Yes but only at the end of WWII.
    Japan already lost the war anyway…
    That’s why is useless.
    As an American player, you’re realy a bad player if you need an Atomic bomb…


  • The dropping of the Atomic bomb had the same effect on Japan as Berlin being taken by the Russians had on Germany. How is the military attack that ended a nations will to fight useless?


  • @crusaderiv:

    As an American player, you’re realy a bad player if you need an Atomic bomb…

    No one “needs” the Atom Bomb to win, just as the USA could have invaded Japan with conventional land forces and won. But the Atom Bomb was a part of history and could make interesting “what if” game results - like what if Germany got the A-bomb first? These things can be played out in Axis and Allies for fun. I have classified the A-bomb as an “end war” tech because whoever gets it and starts dropping it will likely cause others to surrender, unless they get it too. It should surface only at the end of the game, as a nail in the coffin or as a last gasp hope.


  • Here’s a thought: given the limited yield of WWII A-bombs, perhaps an A-bomb house rule should give players the option of using it either as a strategic nuke against a city or as a tactical nuke against enemy ground forces.  In the latter case, there could be a special table giving modified defense rolls for the targets, reflecting the greater ability of tanks and APCs to survive nuclear explosions (as long as they’re not too close) than other units.


  • As an American player, you’re realy a bad player if you need an Atomic bomb…

    A smart American player would have invaded Japan and sustained 1 million plus causalities.  :roll:


  • what about instead of destroying an Major IC have them downgrade them to fully damaged Minor IC


  • It should be from factory to nothing. The morale of the nation falls and the rule needs to be simple and effective results.

    Downgrading a factory means nothing


  • I think downgrading a factory would be huge. either you put 3 units a turn out from your capital or send the 20 ipcs to re upgrade it. Throwing 20 ipcs down the drain just to get back the factory you already had is beyond suck. That and to 2 Atomic attacks (and it can be argued that in game terms would be one) did not by any means destroy all the industrial capacity of the Japanese home islands.


  • Well next turn you upgrade back to major.


  • and have it knocked right back down to a minor


  • On the subject of the battlefield use of tactical nukes, I once read an article about Task Force Razor, an armoured formation which was assigned to carry out a simulated exploitation of a real nuclear explosion (the Apple 2 shot of the Operation Teapot series) in the Nevada desert in 1955.  It’s mentioned very briefly in the Wikipedia article on the Desert Rock Exercises.  As I recall, the scenario assumed that the A-bomb had been dropped on an enemy line; the task force’s job was to drive through the gap which had been created by the blast.  I don’t remember the details, but the maneuver took place quite soon after the explosion and passed close to (but not directly over) ground zero.


  • @rjpeters70:

    Oh yeah, that kind of stuff happened all the time.  There’s great footage of Chinese cavalry (real cavalry, the kind on horses) charging into a nuclear blast to exploit a hole in the adversary lines.  Both the riders and the horses wore gas masks.Â

    Goodness gracious.  Compared with what you’ve just described, the few bits of footage I’ve seen of 1950s-era US troops waiting inside their parked tanks and APCs for the flash and concussion to pass before starting to move seem pretty tame.


  • I think you should not be able to combine a nuclear attack with a conventional, as all combat in AA is considered to be simultaneous, you are not going to be running your infantry into a mushroom cloud. ANY movement into the zone should have be on the next turn after the initial cloud clears.

Suggested Topics

  • 2
  • 3
  • 30
  • 26
  • 16
  • 9
  • 3
  • 4
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

55

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts