Axis and Allies Revised Varient ( historical edition) Phase one proposal (draft)


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    1. Only 1 unit per nation (for perceived balance).
    2. A different type of unit for each nation (for perceived differences among nations as well as for enjoyment for players).
    3. If a nation made 1 type of unit disproportionately more than either their economy would allow or more than other nations produced them, then that should be its national unit.
    4. If a nation made more than 1 type of unit disproportionately more, then choose the unit based on how much more and also to not contradict number 2 above.
    5. If a nation didn’t produce 1 type of unit disproportionately more (significantly more), then choose the unit based on a unique flare or fame (like kamikaze planes).

    OK Soviets:

    for them its about the fact that they were able to outproduce more infantry than germany ( manpower) and tanks and artillery as well as planes… but you only ask for one thing? This is tough because to be accurate they really outproduced in every catagory…

    so then use the 2 tanks for 8 bucks thing

    or roll one d6 = number of infantry that can be created at 2 IPC, so you roll 4 then Soviets get 4 infantry costing 2 IPC each.

    Germany:
    They were able to make alot of subs ( not because they were cheaper) but because it was an important function of their strategy against UK… so allow those 6 IPC subs… or use the Xeno rule of one free sub per turn?

    the other thing that was important to germany was tanks, so perhaps they can upgrade infantry by spending one IPC and the infantry becomes a tank at the end of the turn?

    Another idea is for volkstrum units similiar to russian infantry idea= roll one d6= number of infantry at 2 IPC

    uk:

    on them i favor a break on battleships because thats what they felt would protect the islands

    a second choice would also be cheaper fighters ( they out produced germany in fighters in 1940)

    destroyers is not a good choice

    Japan:

    naval fighters or carrier based fighters would be something that could be done…

    battleships could also be done… they loved their battlewagens or destroyers… transports i dont see this. sorry

    USA:

    Liberty ships ( transports) 2 for 14 IPC?

    second choice is carriers or bombers  they churned out many more carriers (escort class) than anybody else, but liberty ships were by far the easy choice for them…

    USA airforce was comprised of a huge bomber force… a break on these would be good…

    I feel each nation should have two things that are cheaper not just one.



  • Here is an idea that is very different from the topic at hand, but what if we have all air units that don’t move in combat phase in a given turn can move up to their max in non-combat, land temporarily, then move up to their max again? Would that be realistic? I think a fighter should be able to move 4, refuel, and move 4 again in the time of whatever a turn represents. This would be realistic and more fun. Opinions?


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    so that it can engage in more than one attack per turn?



  • No, this is all in the non-combat move phase only.

    Combat with air units is the same.

    If an air unit doesn’t move in combat move phase then in non-combat it can move it’s max (like 4 for fighter) land for literally 1 second (in game time) and more it’s max again.

    It basically moves double in non-combat than in combat (but it has to land in middle of total movement so it doesn’t get unrealistic range if the enemy owns half the world)

    This idea is same as Mideast Oil in OOB rules except doesn’t just apply to the mideast.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    ok well to make things even easier… once a plane if finished with combat it should be able to go anywhere on the board. That way you dont even have to worry where it lands after combat . This makes all that easier? does it create imbalance?



  • I don’t think a fighter should conduct combat AND go anywhere it wants to. 1 or the other. The problem with saying that if it doesn’t do combat, then it can go anywhere in the world is that you could have a fighter move 10 spaces even if no territory it flies over is friendly. Is it realistic to have a fighter fly over 10 hostile territories in a row? No. It needs to refuel somehow. That’s why I think we need the 4 and 4 thing.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    If a turn is 3-6 months and it takes one day to fly over germany from uk and drop bombs, then i dont see how a plane could not “get” to any other controlled territory during the time of ONE turn. Of course we should not allow planes to move over enemy territories during non-combat phase. Perhaps for balance issues each player can just have some set amount of units that they can move about under strategic redeployment rules.



  • attacking and going anywhere is too good. not good for game balance. you need non-combat restriction after combat.

    i think german fighter should be able to take off from s. europe and attack trans-jordan only if they can land 1 away, like in egypt. how do you restrict the attack only if you occupy egypt if there is unlimited non-combat move after combat?



  • Germany:
    They were able to make alot of subs ( not because they were cheaper) but because it was an important function of their strategy against UK… so allow those 6 IPC subs… or use the Xeno rule of one free sub per turn?

    We need some extra incentive so they can be a national unit advantage. What should the advantage be?
    cheap (what we have now)?
    attack at 3 (too powerful perhaps, also not relaistic)?
    can be placed on board not just adjacent to IC but up to 3 spaces away from IC? (interesting, but we’d have to justify the realism)
    other advantage?

    Japan:

    naval fighters or carrier based fighters would be something that could be done…

    battleships could also be done… they loved their battlewagens or destroyers… transports i dont see this. sorry

    transports has been off the design board for some time. i’ll look into destroyers and battleships. that could be interesting.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Well then we should maintain those normal rules, except after combat all planes can move to any other controlled territory as long as they dont fly over enemy territory. That way they are not stuck in africa when you need them in france on the next turn.



  • USA:

    Liberty ships ( transports) 2 for 14 IPC?

    second choice is carriers or bombers   they churned out many more carriers (escort class) than anybody else, but liberty ships were by far the easy choice for them…

    liberty ships are convoy ships. didn’t we say that transport units are only for military units and not commerce?



  • i don’t get what you are saying. that is too powerful to attack with a fighter and land anywhere.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    liberty ships are convoy ships. didn’t we say that transport units are only for military units and not commerce?

    Liberty ships transport the supplies to fight the war. The transport is a needed piece and USA made them better than anybody why cant they be used as the cheaper unit? Bombers are fine too but they are not as needed as cheaper trannys. Liberty ships can transport tanks and men too.



  • Liberty ships transport the supplies to fight the war. The transport is a needed piece and USA made them better than anybody why cant they be used as the cheaper unit? Bombers are fine too but they are not as needed as cheaper trannys. Liberty ships can transport tanks and men too.

    I’m sure they are capable of carrying military units like that, but I didn’t think they brought them into battle. The transport units are amphibious assaulting ships and craft, right? So liberty ships wouldn’t qualify. Can you bring a liberty ship into an amphibious assualt, like in D-day? I don’t think you can.



  • New Idea!

    Every nation gets 1 free IPC per turn to spend on ground units (inf excluded), 2 free IPCs per turn to spend on air units, and 3 free IPCs per turn to spend on naval units.

    This is to promote a more diverse purchasing strategy.



  • I think the rule in the last post will have to be reworded so that it incorporates easier into the game but i think the basic idea is still good. maybe we could make it simpler by saying the first 2 IPCs used for ground troops built in an IC, air units and naval units each turn are free. if you don’t buy a unit in any of the categories, then you lose the 2 free IPCs.

    Here’s another idea I just came up with that could compliment this rule… infantry cost depends where they are placed.

    infantry placed in capital cost 2 each.
    infantry placed in VC contiguously connected to capital cost 3 each.
    infantry placed in VC not contiguously connected to capital cost 4 each.

    infantry max still equals the number of VCPs (5 for Russian German and Japanese capitals, 3 for US and UK capitals and all major VCs, etc…).


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Every nation gets 1 free IPC per turn to spend on ground units (inf excluded), 2 free IPCs per turn to spend on air units, and 3 free IPCs per turn to spend on naval units.

    This is to promote a more diverse purchasing strategy.

    Ok this is outstanding! really… bravo! i think thats exactly what would happen.

    on the second idea… its definatly outside the box thinking… but im not sure about how its historical based. However, when you capture an enemy IC you sould not be able to build the same as if it was yours. In fact i dont think you should be able to use enemy factories because theyr are set up to produce those enemy units and not yours. I dont think anything from the german war machine was build in say Ukraine. I think you should be able to build infantry in any territory as you have allready made, but not in enemy territories and certainly not for additional costs if build within a different part of your own territories. I dont see how its costing more to build a carrier in Puget sound or in washington DC ( eastern usa).



  • Unlimited non-combat air move
    No I don’t think we should have that. Unlimited is bad.
    Just give them LRA ranges but in non-combat move only.
    Weaken LRA slightly but LRA has been given fighter escort anyway. Of course LRA has longer range in combat move also.

    @Imperious:

    If a turn is 3-6 months and it takes one day to fly over germany from uk
    and drop bombs, then i dont see how a plane could not “get” to any other controlled territory during the
    time of ONE turn.

    I don’t like that arguement. 3-6 months…the same can be said for tanks really. But letting them travel
    from China to Europe would be a huge change.
    By the way I don’t think its 3-6months per turn but round?

    National Unit

    I feel each nation should have two things that are cheaper not just one.

    For Russia it seems necessary now.

    Russia: Roll d6 for number of 2 IPC infantries. Roll d6 for number of 4 IPC tanks.

    Germany: 6 IPC submarines

    Japan: Cheap fighters sounds good. Those paper thin Zeros that are so agile.

    UK: Cheap fighters also realistic here. Don’t mind the old destroyers rule either.

    US: Lets do the Essex CV then, 13 IPC, one hit. Otherwise for the expensive (I think 10 better not 14 IPC) Liberty Transport let them “1 land unit + 2 infantry” instead of “1 land unit +  1 infantry”?



  • We kept getting sidetracked into new ideas…
    Lets focus on finalising phase1.

    Is this correct?

    Our Plan:
    Phase1: Income, Production, National Units, Team Victory Condition, Non-combat Game Sequence
    Phase2: Technology, National Advantage, Units, National Victory Condition
    Phase3: Land combat, Naval combat



  • I have added, Neutrals and Italy to Phase 2. And SBR rules with escorts etc to phase 3.

    Phase1: Income, Production, National Units, Team Victory Condition, Non-combat Game Sequence
    Phase2: Technology, National Advantage, Units, National Victory Condition, Italy 6th player, Neutrals
    Phase3: Land combat, Naval combat, New SBR rules

    For Phase 1 National units I also like to see 2 advantages for each nation.

    Russia;  Roll d6 for each 2 IPC infantries and Roll d6 for each 4 IPC tanks
    Germany; 6 IPC SUBS, and also roll d6 for each 2 IPC infantries
    UK: 8 IPC fighters and 18 IPC battleships
    JAP; 8 IPC figthers and battleships attack and defend on a 5
    US; Extra ccapacityon Liberty ships: Always 2 infantry + 1 other land unit. and CA for 13 each (still 2 hits)



  • @Micoom:

    SBR rules with escorts etc to phase 3.

    Actually we last decided not to make players use their fighter pieces for SBR.
    We went for implicit model.
    We made LRA (Long Range Aircraft) technology includes esort fighters. You may choose to loose 10 IPC instead of the bomber.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    I have added, Neutrals and Italy to Phase 2. And SBR rules with escorts etc to phase 3.

    Phase1: Income, Production, National Units, Team Victory Condition, Non-combat Game Sequence
    Phase2: Technology, National Advantage, Units, National Victory Condition, Italy 6th player, Neutrals
    Phase3: Land combat, Naval combat, New SBR rules

    For Phase 1 National units I also like to see 2 advantages for each nation.

    Russia;  Roll d6 for each 2 IPC infantries and Roll d6 for each 4 IPC tanks
    Germany; 6 IPC SUBS, and also roll d6 for each 2 IPC infantries
    UK: 8 IPC fighters and 18 IPC battleships
    JAP; 8 IPC figthers and battleships attack and defend on a 5
    US; Extra ccapacityon Liberty ships: Always 2 infantry + 1 other land unit. and CA for 13 each (still 2 hits)

    yes i support this plan… 2 advantages per nation the outlined plan fore each phase is good as well…



  • you’ll never be able to justify 2 units for each nation… it’s hard enough justifying 1 for UK and Japan. we can balance out 1 unit per nation but you’ll never balance 10 total types of units. i vote for 1 unit type per nation.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    OK then can the 2 unit idea go into optional rules?



  • the 1 unit per nation idea is in the optional rules. There has been a lot of confusion over what the phase 1 rules are so I think I’ll create a new topic concerning what I think they are up to now and then we can all be on the same page.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 252
  • 7
  • 4
  • 117
  • 7
  • 14
  • 17
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

76
Online

14.9k
Users

35.7k
Topics

1.5m
Posts