[Global 1940] Wildcat6305's House Rules and R&D System

Not saying these are at all perfect, but I posted about some potential Vichy house rules for 1940 a while back as well! Just thought I’d share here in case it sparks anything for you as well or anything to go along with your own!

I explain my thoughts in this post, but my hope was to avoid any massive deviations to the standard A&A game play. By that I mean, I didn’t want to go crazy adding or changing a ton of specific rules or anything that exist in the game already.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/26099/vichy-france-global-1940?_=1688593330283

Sorry for the late feedback. I was pretty occupied during the last weeks.  :-(

We did playtest the “Island Hoping” VO and in our opinion it worked very well. The Axis decided to do a G1 Barbarossa and a J1 Pearl Harbor. The idea was to force USA into a Pacific war and that way provide Germany the needed air to crush Russia. This idea worked and the US player did heavily invest in the Pacific to prevent Japan from getting the islands and later even more to get the islands himself. Because of this fact we would say that those new VOs are very good, because before there was not much to lose in the Pacific for the Americans, but a lot to win in Europe.

Resume, we will keep playing with the new VO in our next games and keep you informed!  :wink:

@Argothair:

I think I’m shooting for something in between those two extremes, Caesar. We have a rough idea of the manpower reserves of each nation – so maybe nations can only purchase X infantry per turn at the low cost of 3 IPCs per unit, and then after that they have to pay a higher cost of 3.5 IPCs or 4 IPCs per unit? And then X can vary by nation based on what we know about the nations’ manpower.

E.g.
China – 20 infantry / turn
Russia – 18 infantry / turn
America – 16 infantry / turn
UK Pacific – 14 infantry / turn
Germany – 12 infantry / turn
Japan – 10 infantry / turn
UK Europe – 8 infantry / turn
Italy, France, ANZAC – 6 infantry / turn

I’m not saying that’s accurate; that’s just an illustration of the level of detail that interests me. Other players might be interested in more detail or less detail than that.

Not a bad idea but China and Russia will never have issues because 20 Chinese infantry equal $60, literally larger than the possible total value it can have unless you’re working a rule where China can leave their territories. I think 18 infantry for USSR would be $54 which is larger than it’s own national worth unless it captures Axis territories which the excuse for that is now it has more population to use.

I use WWII Russians and control markers for Bolsheviks. These are controlled by the CPs, but cannot attack outside original Russian areas. Some sort of Siberian railway track to represent the arrival of Allied (i.e. anti-Bolshevik) forces from the east.

Something else I’ve experimented with is the release of POWs; if the war with Russia ends, G & A get a number of infantry to represent the release of prisoners held in Russia. This can be extended to any power being knocked out of the war.

My main change is that collapse is based on national morale, based on casualties suffered & bombing raids on the capitals as well as losing battles and tt. Its fairly obvious that collapse based on income levels favours the CPs too much.

@knp7765:

That is a good idea about limiting the Japanese Kamikaze use until they are kind of pounded down to a low income. The Kamikaze was a weapon born out of desperation after all.

Yes, and in addition to the pressure of Japan being in such a desperate situation, there was another related factor at play: the more the war progressed, the fewer top-notch pilots Japan had at its disposal.  Japan’s training philosophy prior to the war had produced an elite corps of pilots, which gave Japan an initial advantage but left it in a worsening position as the years went by and their casualties mounted.  The US Navy, by contrast, figured out that training large numbers of competent pilots was a better investment than training a small number of superb ones (especially since the US could produce enough aircraft to take advantage of its abundant pilot supply).  When Japan’s situation became dire enough in late 1944 for it to consider extraordinary measures such as kamikaze tactics, one element which worked in favour of the kamizaze concept was that it required very little pilot training: the pilots basically just had to learn how to take off, how to fly to their targets and how to go into a steep dive.  This kind of rudimentary flight instruction was the opposite of the elite-oriented training philosophy Japan had followed prior to the war, so it would make sense to have a rule saying that Japan can only make kamikaze attacks late in the game once Japan is on the ropes.  Maybe this could even be seen as a kind of tech – a capability which isn’t available at the start of the game, but which becomes available later when certain conditions are met.  With a normal tech, you need to invest money to gain the new capability; in this case, kamikaze attacks (a kind of reverse tech because it reflects a training downdgrade) would become available when Japan’s economic and strategic situation drops below a certain threshold.

I like the concept, but it’s way to much work…

Just playing Global as it is is hard enough for most people.  Let alone including supply managment.

Hi, just joined the website, but I have been playing A+A for a long time.  My friends and I played with our own rules, but they  were all even balanced for the most part.  And ohhh boy did we play!  Did all of you get the dreams?  I swear some nights I would have these dreams like “I had three tanks, 5 guys, and 2 fighters….”, replaying these battle sequences in my dream!

We used 8 sided dice, 18 different units not counting artillery, AA gun or IC, 3 different Tech charts with 8 techs each. We had Auto buy which were free units at the star of your turn and Capital Surplus which was a roll at the end of your turn, if you get a good roll then you get a free piece.  We used the Cards of War, which is a deck of cards that I made which help on offense, defense and misc situations.  And of course we played on a home made map.

Before Artillery was introduced in the AA Europe Expansion I think, my friends and I had a custom piece called an Artillery that  was different than the official rules when they came out.  It all started with Germany…how times has an Axis player faced endless UK and American transports just carting dudes in.  And how many times has there been a wall of Russian troops in Karilea?  So I came up with an Artillery…which was an AA gun with a country marker under it.  And it was ruled like a typical AA gun…only one per territory, one on a transport…etc.  but the special thing about the Artillery was that it rolled one die for every defending unit, and hits on a roll of a one.  That’s right…it cost 10 bucks and moved one space and had a range of 2 spaces.  If that isn’t strong enough it could also be used to attack naval units!  As long as a fighter or bomber attack the boats also, an Artillery or two (if in range) could be used as well.  So if UK had 5 transports and a battleship, Germany could attack that fleet with 1 fighter and 2 artillerys.  The artillerys would roll 12 dice total!  Oh yeah, they only fire once per battle.

But in time the aritllerys got used and abused, we even made a new tech called Long Range Artillery to make it really crazy.  Another tech we had was Gunboat Technology, which let transports holding an AA gun or an Artillery and fire then at land or air pieces.  Then another tech we had was Defensive Artillery which meant if you attacked one of my properties and I had an artillery in it, then before you rolled your attack my artillery would first attack you and roll one die for each attacking unit you had.  Any ones that I roll will eliminate one attacking unit.  That was a pretty cool, but not very reliable tech.

I played it for years and loved it.  I made many many maps, ordered countless extra units.  One of the custom units we had was a Chinook.  It carried one Infantry 5 spaces, it attacked at a 2 and defended at a 5, but that is using an 8 sided die.  I made it by cutting the props off of the choppers (special ordered with other pieces)… then I would cut a carrier in half and trim the edges down, then I would glue the chopper blades to the top sides of the destoyer piece and make a nice Chinook with it.

So many good memories with it, I have never played the revised, updated or any other expansion, but I am putting the 50th edition one on the Xmas list for sure!  Thanks for reading!

But I haven’t played it in years, and my stuff is in a storage place in New Jersey, so I don’t have access to all of my custom rules and new pieces.

use the “mechanized units” for trucks

you can use choppers, hover tanks and delta wing bombers too :mrgreen: