• 2022 2021 '19 '15 '14

    Here’s a thought… move the Russian factory from Karelia to Evenki!

  • 2022 2021 '19 '15 '14

    OK so backtracking for a minute to explain the logic.

    *note the “upload folder is full”, so I can’t attach this map? I can’t seem to attach anything, no matter how small I make the filesize? I will try to describe it in words.

    On the OOB board, you can see that…

    Japan leads in valueless territories, for a total of 6 spaces at zero ipcs. Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Wake, Caroline Islands, Solomon Islands and Formosa (why Formosa is its own territory instead of attached to Kwangtung, the way N. Ireland is attached to UK, I’m not really sure. But since it is listed as its own territory that brings us to +6 ipcs total)

    UK is next with 3 spaces at zero: Iceland, Gibraltar and Anglo-Egyptian Sudan for +3 ipcs total.

    USA has 3 spaces at zero: Midway, Eastern Mexico and Greenland for +3 ipcs total.

    So without altering anything else you are looking at overall Axis +6 ipcs, Allies +6 ipcs to bring all valueless territories into play at least 1 ipc. This is described in the first map attached below. To keep with the minimums you would have the following starting income…

    Russia 24
    Germany 41
    UK 34
    Japan 36
    USA 45

    This spread is not particularly desirable though, as it does nothing to increase the strength of Russia (which is what game balance would seem to require!) I would suggest that since Japan’s increase for their valueless territories is already offset by UK/US increase for their valueless territories (and by the fact that Japan can use their extra 6 against Russia), that Russia must be increased by at least 6, probably closer to 10, to maintain overall parity. This is without even touching the numbers for Germany, just to give them enough to face the +6 Japan will receive.

    Now Russia has a total of 6 starting territories at a value of 1 ipc, increasing each of these by 1 ipcs would put them at 30 to start.

    Russia 30
    Germany 41
    UK 34
    Japan 36
    USA 45

    This is the bare minimum required I think, in order to change all zero ipc territories into 1 ipc territories, without totally busting the game set up. However, this minimum doesn’t change the basic gameplay in any appreciable way. Basically all the same strategies apply with the same drawbacks and constraints. So I would say, if you take the map below as the starting point, then the question is, what else to change (and how to offset it so the game remains balanced.)

    If you give UK 1 more ipc somewhere (India?), and Germany 3 ipcs somewhere (eastern front or Scandinavian), that would bring the total to… 80 Axis vs 110 Allies (up from 71 to 97 OOB.) So basically a 30 ipc swing instead of 26.

    It is possible to knock Japan’s total down from 36, if you drop East Indies or Borneo from 4 ipcs to 3 ipcs. You could give the IPC to Germany somewhere contested. This would make Japan and UK (given the adjustments above) both the same at 35 ipcs and USA and Germany likewise both the same at 45.

    Also, USA has extra IPCs in Central USA that can be pushed out to contested territories, like China, Midway, Hawaii, Alaska etc, so they could raise individual territories without altering the total, just stealing it from Central USA and moving it to more interesting locations. So that is where I would start, when thinking about how to mod production without busting the set up.

    Russia 30
    Germany 45
    UK 35
    Japan 35
    USA 45

    From this position, it is fairly easy to raise Russia still further if needed. I suggest increasing in increments of 5 ipcs as the cleanest. Basically take 5 of their lowest value territories (now 2 ipcs) and increase them by 1 more ipc. And you get 35. Lets call this a low-medium production adjustment, as compared to the one in the original post, which we be a decidely high production adjustment.

    Any thoughts?

  • 2022 2021 '19 '15 '14

    OK I have updated the link per request, to provide a Low/Medium scale production mod for 1942.2 as well, using ideas outlined in this thread.

    http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/High-production-mod-for-1942-second-edition-tp7585507.html

    Any thoughts?

    I believe Russia at 30 is definitely workable. As a starting income it is much better than 24. A solid 30 ipcs allows for a purchase of 10 inf, or 4 inf 3 tanks, or 4 inf 2 art 1 fighter, or 6 inf 1 bomber etc. To get Russia up to 30, you don’t have to mod the start values nearly as much. Though I do suggest, if trying this out, that we just bring the values of the valueless territories to 1, since this activates the Pacific and gets away from the idea of even needing spaces at zero for this game to still work fine. 🙂

    I propose the following, for all Axis and Allies games going forward: If a territory is not worth 1 ipc, then don’t put it on the map! If it is important enough to be on the map, then it is important enough for a single ipc. If not, it should simply be collapsed into another territory.

  • 2022 2021 '19 '15 '14

    I’ll try to confine my discussions about industrial production capacity/certificates to this thread, to avoid spamming the forum, but I just wanted to point out that…

    The GDP for Japan and the Soviet Union in 1942, was  basically the exact reverse of what it is in A&A.
    If anything Russia should have the starting income of 30, and Japan’s should be 24!

    But I’m beyond feigning any appeals to historical analogy for the OOB IPC distribution. I just don’t think the numbers are analogous to anything in the real world, or at least I don’t see it. So once again I will argue in favor of more flexibility for these numbers. From a design standpoint I don’t see the logic in getting cornered by the idea that territory X needs to be worth such and such, just because it was that way in Classic or the current game.

    Does this make sense to anyone else?

    I mean, if you grant that the overall disparity between Japan and Russia in this instance is purely for gameplay purposes (because the game wouldn’t work otherwise), then why hold back in other areas? To me this just reinforces the already abstracted idea I have about IPCs.

    I think production is the most interesting aspect of Axis and Allies, it and the map (which it is part of) influence everything else in the game. I wish we could revisit the foundation of IPCs in detail. If changes to production were given the same (or even half) the consideration that units get, as alterations to the OOB set up for game balance, I think it’d be easier to change the dynamics.

    Bidding to break battles, or break whatever OOB first round set up comes written on the card, is just not a particularly satisfactory solution to game balance. If a preplacement bid is the only solution to game balance, then people will always use it to break whatever battle has the greatest potential swing. Find the place on the board where the margins are the narrowest and then swing it one way or the other with an extra unit. To me this gets way ahead of the problem. I see the problem more in the direct starting income/production numbers displayed on the mapboard, rather than in the starting total unit value. Total Unit Value seems to exist in a kind of happy flux state where the numbers can be changed and tweaked out from version to version, whereas for the most part the IPC values (or relative values) remain static across every board.

    This comes from the fact that Production is supposed to hold to something “real” somehow and constant, whereas units are admitted to be variable in what they represent depending on the circumstance. With units you can create your own narrative, and introduce a degree of flexibility with certain units relative to other other individual units. I wish we could treat territories and ipc values with this same attitude of creative flexibility.

    So what, for example, if Hawaii is worth 2 ipcs or 3 ipcs instead of 1? Or if Kwangtung gets dropped from 3 to 2 or to 1? I mean does anyone care about internal consistency with ipcs in this range (e.g. Territories at or below a value of 3 ipcs the replacement cost of a single infantry unit)? If it lead to more dynamic gameplay when changed, would you care? I would suggest that production bids, or outright mods to production on the OOB map might be more interesting than pre-placement bids or unit adjustments, as a game balance mechanism.


  • This mod is great  😄 helps with the balance issue for the most part been playing this at home think it’s great

  • '17 '16

    @Black_Elk:

    OK I have updated the link per request, to provide a Low/Medium scale production mod for 1942.2 as well, using ideas outlined in this thread.

    http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/High-production-mod-for-1942-second-edition-tp7585507.html

    Any thoughts?

    I believe Russia at 30 is definitely workable. As a starting income it is much better than 24. A solid 30 ipcs allows for a purchase of 10 inf, or 4 inf 3 tanks, or 4 inf 2 art 1 fighter, or 6 inf 1 bomber etc. To get Russia up to 30, you don’t have to mod the start values nearly as much. Though I do suggest, if trying this out, that we just bring the values of the valueless territories to 1, since this activates the Pacific and gets away from the idea of even needing spaces at zero for this game to still work fine. 🙂

    I propose the following, for all Axis and Allies games going forward: If a territory is not worth 1 ipc, then don’t put it on the map! If it is important enough to be on the map, then it is important enough for a single ipc. If not, it should simply be collapsed into another territory.

    I really agree with you on this.
    A zero IPC territory have no interest in itself, unless someone put a big fleet with Transports around in a prep-step for an invasion of a more important territory, besides this, it is a deserted area. And if any player have to choose between a zero and a 1 IPC before going further, he will prefer to fight for something instead of nothing.

Suggested Topics

  • 42
  • 3
  • 4
  • 4
  • 12
  • 5
  • 15
  • 7
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

51
Online

16.3k
Users

38.0k
Topics

1.6m
Posts