Go beyond A&A : World Domination
Spartanx last edited by
I am currently trying to build up a house rule that basically goes beyond simply Axis vs Allies.
Basically the game will be divided into 5 different camps trying to seek world domination.
- The Pact of Steel (Ger+Ita)
- The Allies (UK+Fr)
- The USSR
- The USA
The focus of the game will go beyond destroying another camps, but trying to seek for balance of power and self-interests.
The game will remain the same until turn 4 when US and Russia can join the war freely.
Anzac will be integrated into UK Pacific. UK Pacific controls all Dutch terrorities from turn 1
Tech will be introduced in the game similar to ‘The Cliffside Bunker House Rules’
- Controlling Washington, London, Paris, Berlin, Rome, Moscow, Calcutta, Sydney, Tokyo will each be given 1 free tech.
- 6 victory cities on the Pacific map (US+China count together)
- 7 victory cities on the Europe map (Ger+It, UK+Fr count together)
- combined total of 100 IPCs on the income tracker
which will in total be 12 diff tech. (By doing so the weak UK will have an advantage of having 3 tech at the beginning)
New possible national objectives
- Ger occupy London +5IPC
- Japan controlling or ruling China (will be explain later) +5IPC
- UK Europe full Allies control of Africa +5IPC
- UK Europe London-Calcutta free of enemy warship (if pass by Med)+5IPC (if pass by Cape of Good Hope) +2IPC
- UK Europe full Allies control of South America +3IPC
- UK Europe occupy Washington +5IPC
- USSR control +3IPC or ruling +5IPC China
- Italy occupy Spain, Turkey, Paris, London each+5IPC
- Italy Axis full control over Africa +5IPC
- USA full control of South America (all territories) +5IPC
- USA control of North America +3IPC
- USA control over victorious cities +5IPC each
- France occupy Spain, Rome, Berlin, Warsaw, Moscow +5IPC each
New China Rule
Given the ongoing Chinese Civil War, several scenarios may apply:
-Japan can set up a Chinese puppet govt (Capital in Kiangsu) before the collect income turn if all Chinese territories are occupied.
All original Chinese territories (except for Manchuria, Kwangtung, Hainan and Formosa depends on the Japanese player) must be given back to China if Japan decides to do so.
+5IPC bonus will still apply even the puppet state is set up
-USSR can set up a Communist Chinese govt if the USSR control 3 or above Chinese territories. +3 IPC
Manchuria will be the capital if the unification of China by Communist China happens. (Hainan and Formosa is considered to be part of China)
-UK and Ger can also set up Chinese puppet govt (Capital in Kiangsu) if 6 or above Chinese territories are occupied. (Formosa will be considered as part of China)
There can only be 2 diff Chinese govt maximum. Mongolia is considered to be part of China.
Japan and USSR have their own ‘Burma road’ type bonus of +6IPC to China
USSR: Kansu, Novosibirsk, Samara, Russia
Japan: Kiangsu, SZ19, SZ6, Japan
China can produce inf and art anywhere on its territories. After the unification of China, it can set up industries and build all types of troops as a normal country. (must be build on IC)
Chinese army can leave China after unification.
- Countries are allowed to collect IPC even their capital has fallen. UK will apply the 2nd Capital rule as ‘The Cliffside Bunker House Rules’.
France income will be placed in London if Paris has fallen. It will be taken together with the UK IPC if London is fallen. The income after will be placed in the 2nd Capital afterwards.
These are just some basic thoughts. I think it could buff up the UK a bit and give Japan worthy rewards if decided to do China first.
Players would need to seek the balance of power while trying to strive for its best interest to prevent one side becoming too overpowered.
Please share ur thoughts
You’ve indicated that “The focus of the game will go beyond destroying another camps, but trying to seek for balance of power and self-interests” and that “Players would need to seek the balance of power while trying to strive for its best interest to prevent one side becoming too overpowered.” This makes the game sound like an open-ended simulation that has no precisely-defined victory conditions, and perhaps no victory conditions at all. If that’s the case, my concern is that players won’t know what they’re supposed to do, won’t know on what basis they should be formulating their strategies, and won’t know how to decide who (if anyone) has won the game. The impression I get, perhaps mistakenly, is that this isn’t so much a concept which “goes beyond simply Axis vs Allies” but rather which goes sideways from A&A into the realm of open-ended simulation games that involve the political and military and social interaction of many nations over the course of decades of fictitious game time and (potentially) months or even years of actual play time.
Spartanx last edited by
True there are no victory conditions at all. Ultimately, one power will become the strongest amongst all. If a victory condition is really needed, it would be survive and defeat all other players.
And also its correct that it will turn out to be an open-ended game will maybe double or triple game time of the original game.
The reason this house rule is developed is that me and my friends often find ourself in the position of becoming dominating powers as Russia, Germany or the USA but still want to continue the game and expand our hard-built empire. At the end of the day, it is just a house rule that me and my friends loved and would like to share with other A&A lovers here.