EXECUTIVE ORDER: if you add 1 rule you have to remove 2 other rules

I like all the special sea zone restrictions. Gibraltar and Danish straights. Any thoughts on Suez going through Egypt.

Also like the inclusion of aaafire and some limited transportation capability. Anything that makes for more attractive ship builds always seems good to me.
:-D

On the air, the main impediment to ready testing FtF is the requirement to buy more stuff than comes in the boxed game. With a G40 expansion you still only have 3 sculpts.

I was thinking about this issue for the C5 strategic bomber concept in 1942.2.

One thought I had about Tacs in 1942.2 for the Defenseless Strat B idea I had, was that some aircraft might be represented on the map by a scult that always has a green chip under it (saving all green chips for this use). So with that idea, I was thinking you could represent 3 air units with only 2 sculpts. For example

Strat B = C5 SBR only
Green Chip Fighter = Tactical Bomber
Fighter (red or gray chip) = Fighter

Or you could use a roundel, or paint a tail, but the green chip seemed pretty easy to work with.
Fighter can still fit on a deck that way.

Perhaps if its a game designed to use G40 sculpts for 1942.2 you could just do the same thing with the bomber sculpts? Like
Medium bomber = normal sculpt
Strat bomber = green chip sculpt.

Just an idea to make it easy to test, without a big commitment in painting or purchasing new stuff.

For the factories, I do worry that it takes any series threat to Tokyo from the Americans pretty much off the table. It’s very hard to get onto the mainland in an effective way with US, without expanding production on the money islands. Is this what you are trying to avoid? Or are you trying to prevent Japan from using one on India/Africa/Australia?

For my part I enjoy the factory unit, so rules that restrict where it can go aren’t as appealing to me. Basically the 3 islands affected, Philippines, East Indies and especially Borneo, are pretty much the only interesting territories in whole the Pacific, by virtue of their production potential, so it seems a shame to lose them.

@Tortn91:

How about when Paris is taken Normandy-Bordeaux, Southern France, the navy in Mediterranean and the french force in North Africa joined the Nazis, but half of the units in France is moved to UK represents Free French forces who fled and the rest of the French territories in Africa and around the world remains unde Free French control.

It would have to be considered an alternate-history scenario.  The French Navy and the French colonial forces never joined the Nazis, and the number of French forces who crossed the Channel from France to England to form the Free French was nowhere near large enough to represent half of France’s military units.

On the other hand, it’s perfectly accurate to have some of France’s colonial territories go over to the Free French side soon after France is occupied becauset that’s what happened in reality.

I went lower at 15/23 because after J1 the Chinese lose 4 tt’s normally, and 15/23 just about doubles what happens from there. I think that 18/23 (and is still divisible by 3 for inf BTW) would be fine though, and most likely would work for the game your in now. I feel that they should at the very least should be able to help to liberate India (part of the Burma road, and I believe some Chinese divisions did end up retreating to India) if they have their own affairs in order first (18/23 does that IMO). It’s really what your comfortable with.

@lnmajor:

how about this?
place a roundel under a sub on the board to signify its submerged. it can only move 1 space per turn submerged. you must use ASW search roll of 1-2 to detect sub from destroyer or cruiser. surfaced sub can move 2 spaces per turn. ASW roll is 1-4 when sub is surfaced. now, on second turn, if sub remains submerged put second roundel under sub. beggining of 3rd turn submerged sub must surface for 1 turn no matter where it is. even if it has to surface strait into hostile ships and be attacked.

not a bad idea. The one benefit to having them off the board is the surprise factor.

Great ideas though…

Yes, I am quite insane  :-D

As for how I got it all to fit, I typed it into a Word document, and then copied and pasted.

I plan to playtest these rules and modify them as needed.  I was trying for as much historical accuracy as I could with the starting forces, while making the minimum number of changes to the official rules.  I got the idea from World in Flames, which is a great game, but, practically speaking, unplayable.  Even if you read and understand all the rules, finding one or more opponents who also have read and understand the rules is pretty much impossible.  You can, however, play Axis and Allies while you’re drunk (Been there.  Done that.  Got the T-shirt.)  But I like the idea of having the same basic problems, options, starting forces, and deployments the real military and political leaders of the time had to face.

Now, I’ll admit that the Vichy France rules are a bit more detailed than most A&A players prefer, and I understand why the game disigners decided to just leave them out.  But, if I was going to give the French a realistic starting fleet, I had to have the Vichy option to keep the combined French and British fleets from blowing the Italians out of the water on turn one.  It also gives the Allies the same uncertainty about what the Vichy French forces would do if their territories were invaded.  Historically, it was a major concern for the British.  Remember that they actually bombed the Vichy French fleet in port in North Africa, killing, IIRC, a couple of thousand French sailers , because they were afraid of having it fall into Axis hands.

you have to build bombers to carry paratroopers and you only carry one of them and that can only be dropped 2 spaces away from friendly forces. The bomber commitment alone precludes the issue of “flying shock armies from buck rogers”.  Unfortunately some feel that you should be able to build and use them w/o bombers and i know 100% that this is a broken game, however, the OOB is somewhat balanced.

but if you feel its not balanced you can impose a “training cost” of 1 or more IPC every time you drop airborne, paid to model training of these elite specialists. Also, limit the build of one airborne per turn ( example: if you build 3 bombers in a turn you only can use 1 additional airborne drop the turn following placement and 1 each following turn for the next 3 turns)

This would preclude the really stupid and impossible idea of Germany building lots of bombers and thinking they will have an immediate Sealion because they didn’t buy anything for 5 turns and all of a sudden spurged on bombers as some kind of trick.

Let me clarify my reasoning on point number 2:

Submarines defend at a zero because they are not firing back, they are battening the hatches, flooding the ballast tanks and adjusting the dive planes hoping to get below depth charge depth before being sunk. (Which is silly, I guess you should say destroyed not sunk, since they sink on purpose…)

Meanwhile, they attack at three because they quietly slip into range, hide in the waves, line up their shot just right and fire.  Since there is resistance to giving them called shot abilities (where they tell us who they aim for before firing, like Kaitens and Kamikazees did in AARe) I figure this is a solution that would work.

Also, it should be mentioned that I am assuming Super Submarines has been changed to Super Destroyers which would increase Destroyer Attack Power = to Submarine Power.

Submarines do not defend with a surface fleet, they travel solo usually way out ahead as scouts or raiding enemy shipping.  Treat them like transports if they are detected and defenseless.

Thats right. To me, the multiple collect income causes inflation.
Yes collecting income before combat does stop this.

Regarding the essay on a pad that can be reduced. For example in AARHE the Axis/Allies sequence makes. Its not 4 turns between Russia 1 and Russia 2. So you don’t have to hire an accountant to keep track of things even if we collect income before combat.