• '18 '17 '16 '15 Customizer

    @regularkid:

    Its actually really simple: China was not a modern, industrialized country at the time of the war. This is not “derogatory.” This is a fact. What you characterize as a “wholesale rewriting of the rulebook,” is actually already part and parcel of the existing rules. . .since China already cannot build factories. Making this restriction apply to all powers that occupy China would make the rules more uniform, not less. . . and it would also make plenty of sense from both a historic and gameplay perspective.

    Just my 2 cents, man

    Even though your (and the game’s) characterization of China as disorganized and pre-industrial is accurate, the rules are pretty clear in that China cannot build Industrial Complexes (anywhere) and if they capture one of their territories with a Industrial Complex it is simply removed. No issues.

    Re-formatting the rule so that the Axis cannot build factories there either is rather shortsighted in my opinion. It is convenient in reducing the threat of a China crush by Japan, but does so artificially by removing the Japanese factory build option entirely from the table. Historically, China was not industrialized, but Japan was and brought a good deal of it to China. Manchuria in particular, as an established puppet state, became a large industrial production center for Japan in the 1920s and remained so throughout the war (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Manchukuo#Industry).

    In A&A G40, the Manchukuo/Manchuria territory is noted as being Chinese, but under Japanese occupation to start the game. In my opinion, Japan should probably have a minor factory there to begin with, but OOB that is not so. Taking away Japan’s ability to build one there has no historical basis. There is likewise no reason to prevent Japan from being able to build Industrial Complexes in other Chinese territories either. If you were to except Manchuria from your proposed rule, on the above mentioned historical grounds, what is the real difference between it and other Chinese territories? Especially the others under Japanese control to begin the game. There really isn’t any.

    The rule you suggest is impeccably simple, but it is historically unfounded and completely removes a viable option for the Japanese player, boxing him in just a bit more. Personally, I think there are other ways to address the China crush and cross-Asia push to Moscow.


  • Any body try adding more Chinese Inf to the setup ?

    Quote from: GODLEADER on October 22, 2015, 08:29:17 am
    My house rule for China. If no allies troop in China, China collect 5 ipc + normal ipc and the Burma road, Japan is hardly for take all China, In 3 game test, Is not arrive Japan take all China but is not impossible.
    This might work also.
    –-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Or US lend lease…?

  • '16 '15 '14 Customizer

    @LHoffman:

    The rule you suggest is impeccably simple, but it is historically unfounded…

    In the “official” AA Revised Edition there is a National Advantage listed for the USSR - the first time they are invaded by Japan then 4 Russian infantry rise up there, so there is a precedent for infantry rising up.

  • '17 '16 '15

    I think 5 would be too many for global. 2 might work. It wouldn’t be enough to stop them if they really want it, but it would slow them down. Maybe make it random 1-3. Give Japan a little uncertainty for what she is getting into.


  • yeah yeah 5 men popping up OK

    Now lets talk about the factory……

    IMHO, I think that China should be allowed to keep the factories they conquer, since that is how they became industrialized in the real world. That, plus a lot of lend lease from USA and Russia.

  • '18 '17 '16 '15 Customizer

    @Der:

    @LHoffman:

    The rule you suggest is impeccably simple, but it is historically unfounded…

    In the “official” AA Revised Edition there is a National Advantage listed for the USSR - the first time they are invaded by Japan then 4 Russian infantry rise up there, so there is a precedent for infantry rising up.

    Sorry, you misunderstood me. I was talking specifically about the factory build issue not about infantry rising up if attacked. There are at least a couple of examples in different games of infantry “rising up”. I have no problem with that.

  • 2020 '19 '18 '17 '16

    It’s evident China needs cheap defense one way or another. What about 0/1 militia for 1 IPC or two units for 3 IPC?

  • '16 '15 '14 Customizer

    @LHoffman:

    Sorry, you misunderstood me. I was talking specifically about the factory build issue not about infantry rising up if attacked. There are at least a couple of examples in different games of infantry “rising up”. I have no problem with that.

    Oh OK sorry about that, Hoff. Well, others may not have known about that past rule anyway - so it didn’t hurt to share it here for their sake. Â

  • '18 '17 '16 '15 Customizer

    @General:

    It’s evident China needs cheap defense one way or another. What about 0/1 militia for 1 IPC or two units for 3 IPC?

    I think something to this effect is pretty reasonable and more representative of reality. My impression is that Chinese forces, on the whole, were ad hoc formations (not true soldiers) and very reactionary/defensive in their tactics as opposed to offensive. Militia level units would take care of this pretty well, but we would have to reconcile the fact that China could no longer attack Japan (and therefore are more subject to Japan’s initiative). Unless Japan could use both militia and regular infantry, with only the regular infantry being able to attack. Seems like a good balance (militia, infantry and artillery) for China. You could even have the militia rise up (5 per territory) when attacked by Japan, as suggested. This makes China a pretty powerful foe.

  • '16 '15 '14 Customizer

    @barney:

    I think 5 would be too many for global. 2 might work. It wouldn’t be enough to stop them if they really want it, but it would slow them down. Maybe make it random 1-3. Give Japan a little uncertainty for what she is getting into.

    Yes - as I said earlier you would have to adjust it for other game editions. We’ve been trying an “Arms buildup” where you buy the units you want and put them out before the game starts instead of using the standard setup, so Japan can really pile up some offense on China’s borders in our game.

  • '18 '17 '16 '15 Customizer

    @Der:

    Oh OK sorry about that, Hoff. Well, others may not have known about that past rule anyway - so it didn’t hurt to share it here for their sake. ��

    No worries, and I do think the precedent you mentioned is important to consider.

  • '16 '15 '14 Customizer

    @Narvik:

    IMHO, I think that China should be allowed to keep the factories they conquer, since that is how they became industrialized in the real world. That, plus a lot of lend lease from USA and Russia.

    But then how would China use the factory? Would they be able to start building anything they want like other nations?


  • @Der:

    @Narvik:

    IMHO, I think that China should be allowed to keep the factories they conquer, since that is how they became industrialized in the real world. That, plus a lot of lend lease from USA and Russia.

    But then how would China use the factory? Would they be able to start building anything they want like other nations?Â

    Yes, of course, with a factory China can build anything they want, and HBG sell you the pieces you will need.

    When the Korean war start in 1950, China is able to manufacture tanks, artillery, fighters and ships all by themselves, in the very factories they conquerd from Japan

  • '17 '16 '15

    @General:

    It’s evident China needs cheap defense one way or another. What about 0/1 militia for 1 IPC or two units for 3 IPC?

    I use militia and found it to work well. A0 D1 M1 C2 limit 8. It makes for better builds in that you can usually get all your cash into play. It also allows cheap counterattacks when possible. I also added an AAgun.

    Japan can still get through if she really wants too, but she has to work harder at it.

  • 2020 '19 '18 '17 '16

    That sounds reasonable, and your last point is the most important one. Japan should be able to steamroll China, but only with a concerted effort that leaves other flanks open.


  • @barney:

    @General:

    It’s evident China needs cheap defense one way or another. What about 0/1 militia for 1 IPC or two units for 3 IPC?

    I use militia and found it to work well. A0 D1 M1 C2 limit 8. It makes for better builds in that you can usually get all your cash into play. It also allows cheap counterattacks when possible. I also added an AAgun.

    Japan can still get through if she really wants too, but she has to work harder at it.

    Barney, love this idea, and I enjoyed playing with it on the modded G40 map u provided.

    Here’s a thought experiment for you: what would happen if you didn’t place any limit on the number of militia? Would it break the game? With a cost of 2, and defense of only 1, it might not. That’d be good, cuz the less restrictions placed on stuff the better.

  • '17 '16 '15

    @kid

    IDK I’ve never tried it. I didn’t want to see huge spams by Russia and wanted to reflect manpower levels a little as well.


  • What if you made militia movement 0? I think militia were usually local conscripts, called up on a moments a notice to defend in case of an emergency. Taking away their movement ensures you don’t have massive hordes of militia roaming the landscape. And since Russia only has so many production slots, “spamming” might not be a problem if the units have to stay put after they are constructed. Only one way to find out though. . . .

  • '17 '16 '15

    yea you’d just have to try it and see. They can only be built in original TTs but maybe they should be restricted to original TTs as well. IDK though it seems to work out ok letting them move around. If you have to transport them it’s one less regular that gets to go. I know the Germans shipped dudes all over the place.

    My concern with no limits is a pile of allied air an100 militia in Russia and well… that’d be a tough nut to crack, but as I said I haven’t tried it.

  • '17 Customizer

    In 20+ games played the Chinese have yet to be 100% crushed.  Once FEC joins and help keep Burma open, it is all over for the Japanese.  The Japanese already get bogged down in China and have to keep all or most of their airforce there.  It can take perhaps 5 turns to chase China to the edge of Russia.

  • 2021 2020 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 Customizer

    @sjelso:

    In 20+ games played the Chinese have yet to be 100% crushed.  Once FEC joins and help keep Burma open, it is all over for the Japanese.  The Japanese already get bogged down in China and have to keep all or most of their airforce there.  It can take perhaps 5 turns to chase China to the edge of Russia.

    Japan is spending to much time and money in China. Japan needs there planes elsewhere too.

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 10
  • 26
  • 30
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

29
Online

15.7k
Users

37.2k
Topics

1.6m
Posts