New Axis & Allies Varient



  • I am planning to creat a board game using Axis & Allies type rules, but instead of using locked Alliences it would be a free for all game like Risk. It would be set in the modern era with todays most powerfull countries fightring for global supremance. I was thinking the European Union could count as a country for game purposes. I was thinking the economy rules could be just as they are in A&A, but the political and milatary aspects of the game should be deeper(ecpseiacly the politics part). Even though it is a game of global conquest it should still have a realistic feel to it, the milatary units should share the same streagths and weaknesses as they do in real life, you shouldn’t be able to get away with nuking a country that did not want to give you 3 IPCs that turn even when sayed please.

    Here are the major powers I was thinking of
    Almost positive will be in the game
    United States
    China
    India
    Russia

    Maybes
    European Union
    Japan
    Brazil
    Middle Eastern Coaltion( Really not sure about this one)

    Well, tell be what you think. what countries should be playable and wich ones should not, make up rules for units , post info on rule world politcs, anything that can push this game along, I’m really relying on you to help me finish this game. Any questions, post them too.


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

    When does the game take place?



  • 2010, 2020 some time in the near future


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

    Well then forget Brazil… American player in such a war would have all the help of the latin nations like it did in ww2. This American Coalition would consist of Canada ( sake Quebic)  and most of S america with a few desenting neutrals ( cuba)



  • Interesting, I like it, could you come up with other satilite states for other nations, or maybe the US player good be a super power and the game could be designed so the US purposly has an advantage over the other nations. Of course other players resentment of the US player having more would likly lead to alliences against the US. Then the game would naturally balence out.

    I conda like this idea of one player having an unfair “advatage” at the begining of the game. What do you think?



  • @Imperious:

    Well then forget Brazil… American player in such a war would have all the help of the latin nations like it did in ww2. This American Coalition would consist of Canada ( sake Quebic)  and most of S america with a few desenting neutrals ( cuba)

    I can’t imagine why south americans would help the USA. There is a strong anti-northamerican sense in latin america because of USA actions in the past (Chile p.e.). Not only Castro. Think in Venezuela or Bolivia. Sure Evo Morales or Chavez would not aid the US. Lula in Brasil would not aid them i think and Chile also not. Mexicans would want emigration advantages and the others would be neutrals having their own troubles (drugs in Colombia). At the best, they would do very unstable allies for the US. Canada maybe could join but they seem to pacifist to join in a global conquest. In fact, US better allies would be Israel, Japan and UK.

    Anyway, I’d suggest as playable countries:

    USA
    European Union
    Russia
    Islamic Alliance
    China


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

    but under the threat of a real world war where the entire world was fighting for its own interests, their are natural allies that come back to the fold. In eastern europe for example if Russia was threatenend all those former eastern bloc nations and breakaway territories would come back to help the old Russia. Old feelings would be left at the door to fight the larger calling that threatenend them all.



  • You both bring up good points, but what i think it comes down to is what type of game it’s going to be. And sense its partially a diplomacy game choosing sides in a global conflict should represented in the game. I think I’ll make Brazil a player nation and make the rest of south America neutral regions that will either submit to players though force or peaceful means like in the game War! Age of Imperialism by Eagle games.
    Player Nations and why they are player nations
    United States: Greatest Country ever, duh?
    China: Growing economy, huge army, huge country, huge population
    Russia: Actually this country lacks everything I require for a country to be a player nation. And it wouldn’t a player nations unless it wasn’t the biggest country in the world. It is just to much space for a single Neutral Nation
    European Union: Although the dream of a Unified Europe travels farther away each day it would be to complicated to split Europe up amongst its many powerful nations.
    India: It has the army, the nukes, the population, the land, the economy, etc., Why not.
    Brazil: mentioned above.
    Japan: although small, very powerfull and a much needed counter balance to China in the south pacific.

    Why no Mid East Coalition?: Its to unrealistic and out there. Osamas dreams of a New Muslim Caliphate are far from materializing. I think in this game The mideast and Africa should be a huge battle ground for the player-nations to fight over and claim satellite states.

    PS: Remember the player nations can and will change over the course of making this game. If you disagree with this selection of nations please say why.

    I’d like to hear what you guys think of military units in modern warfare and which ones should be represented in the game.


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

    United States: Greatest Country ever, duh?
    US should include at the very least : Canada, Japan, South Korea and UK

    China: Growing economy, huge army, huge country, huge population
    China includes Vietnam, North Korea, and Mongolia

    Russia: Actually this country lacks everything I require for a country to be a player nation. And it wouldn’t a player nations unless it wasn’t the biggest country in the world. It is just to much space for a single Neutral Nation
    Russia includes all affiliate nations and some eastern bloc nations.

    European Union: Although the dream of a Unified Europe travels farther away each day it would be to complicated to split Europe up amongst its many powerful nations.
    Germany, Spain, central Europe, poland, Italy,Austria… France is on its own or aligned with them. this coalition is very volital because France cant make up its mind from one day to the next. I would consider a large seperate map for Europe for warfare in these nations because you would want to have more global territories.

    India: It has the army, the nukes, the population, the land, the economy, etc., Why not.
    On its own they hate China and Pakistan but are not aggressive

    Brazil: mentioned above.
    All south America is open to either independent or allies of USA… the US player has best chance to convert them.

    Japan: although small, very powerfull and a much needed counter balance to China in the south pacific.
    Their existence depends on USA the threat of China pushes them as US ally. japan has no natural ally in Asia anymore. At least until China is destroyed…

    best book on this… but its 1985 when the war starts. This book is complete with OOB for both sides. You may want to get SPI’s third world war which has a rather good game. its a good starting point for research. The problem is too far in the future had no adeduate research and secondly, the viability of such a conflict is very speculative. At least a 1985 scenario has a complete Soviet Union and other realistic allies and enemies.
    Also note you can obtain nice plastic pieces for this game that are cold war styles of equipment from table tactics. Not to mention the other companies that offer pieces of current and past tanks and planes.
    The Third World War, August 1985, by General Sir John Hackett, set in a 1980s war based on the NATO scenario



  • @Imperious:

    United States: Greatest Country ever, duh?
    US should include at the very least : Canada, Japan, South Korea and UK

    China: Growing economy, huge army, huge country, huge population
    China includes Vietnam, North Korea, and Mongolia

    Russia: Actually this country lacks everything I require for a country to be a player nation. And it wouldn’t a player nations unless it wasn’t the biggest country in the world. It is just to much space for a single Neutral Nation
    Russia includes all affiliate nations and some eastern bloc nations.

    European Union: Although the dream of a Unified Europe travels farther away each day it would be to complicated to split Europe up amongst its many powerful nations.
    Germany, Spain, central Europe, poland, Italy,Austria… France is on its own or aligned with them. this coalition is very volital because France cant make up its mind from one day to the next. I would consider a large seperate map for Europe for warfare in these nations because you would want to have more global territories.

    India: It has the army, the nukes, the population, the land, the economy, etc., Why not.
    On its own they hate China and Pakistan but are not aggressive

    Brazil: mentioned above.
    All south America is open to either independent or allies of USA… the US player has best chance to convert them.

    Japan: although small, very powerfull and a much needed counter balance to China in the south pacific.
    Their existence depends on USA the threat of China pushes them as US ally. japan has no natural ally in Asia anymore. At least until China is destroyed…

    best book on this… but its 1985 when the war starts. This book is complete with OOB for both sides. You may want to get SPI’s third world war which has a rather good game. its a good starting point for research. The problem is too far in the future had no adeduate research and secondly, the viability of such a conflict is very speculative. At least a 1985 scenario has a complete Soviet Union and other realistic allies and enemies.
    Also note you can obtain nice plastic pieces for this game that are cold war styles of equipment from table tactics. Not to mention the other companies that offer pieces of current and past tanks and planes.
    The Third World War, August 1985, by General Sir John Hackett, set in a 1980s war based on the NATO scenario



  • In a Diplomacy style game, Brazil could fit and sure it would be easier from Lula getting aid from Chavez, Evo Morales or Castro. Those three never would aid the US.

    European Union would get a boost in a Diplomacy game. Her population would never support a long war, diplomacy fits more on EU. The russians wold have troubles in convincing ancient soviet republics join their cause. Baltic states, Ucrania and even maybe Poland not join.

    Let the Mongols neutral. I see no reason they can join China or Russia. In our times, it seems as an asian Switzerland.

    The muslims could fit as an alliance. At least Saudi Arabia has enough power or money to get some allies. Easier than Chavez and Castro aiding the US  :lol:

    And nukes should be restricted or they ruled the whole game. If it is diplomacy, a lone nuke is the end of diplomacy… and sure the end of mankind  😢


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

    If the designer wants a game taking place in the future… there is no castro. once castro goes Cuba throws off the yoke of Communism. By the end of the year they probably put up casinos again



  • What od you think about milatary units in the game


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

    for what period? 1975-1985-2025?

    ill make a list depending on what year the war starts. need to know d6 or d12 dice?



  • 2025, d12

    thx


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

    Yikes! i have no idea what will still be around in terms of military hardware… most likely anything out today will be gone and outdated by that date so its impossible to present any realistic OOB… even nuclear weapons will be different by then. If you use whats just out their now it will be much easier to construct a wargame.



  • OK, fine, what military units would be in a d12 2006 game


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



  • thanks a lot
    I’ll start working on the rules and OOB
    I think each unit should represent a corp
    How about you guys!


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

    Yes in a strategic setting its a must! however if your just doing say ww3 in europe you can get away with divisions and its better suited in many cases for modern scenarios ( armies are much smaller then in ww2)

    On the fleets you may want to take accross the board ratios of naval balance and assign a breakdown.’

    so every 3 carriers is represented by one unit
    every 10 missile frigate = one unit

    etc…

    Ill search for nuclear capabilities so players can basically blow up the world for fun!


  • 2007 AAR League

    I like the Idea.  A couple of thoughts.

    5 Major powers seems optimal, my picks:
    US duh? - (w/Britian & Canada)
    European Union (Including the former Soviet Satellite states)
    Russia (The old USSR not including Sateliite countries-I doubt the countries of the Eastern Bloc (the old Warsaw pact) would be eager to realign with Russia, more likely they would ally with the EU.)
    China
    ASEAN (Association of S.E. Asian Nations-Japan, Korea, Taiwan, South Pacific)

    This leaves alot of territory unassigned, some sort of “Economic Spheres of Influence” or Trade could be incorporated to handle these.

    In a free for all game of 5 players max, how will you handle a game with less than the max # of players?

    Nukes…these are a problem.



  • @jsp4563:

    I like the Idea.  A couple of thoughts.

    5 Major powers seems optimal, my picks:
    US duh? - (w/Britian & Canada)
    European Union (Including the former Soviet Satellite states)
    Russia (The old USSR not including Sateliite countries-I doubt the countries of the Eastern Bloc (the old Warsaw pact) would be eager to realign with Russia, more likely they would ally with the EU.)
    China
    ASEAN (Association of S.E. Asian Nations-Japan, Korea, Taiwan, South Pacific)

    This leaves alot of territory unassigned, some sort of “Economic Spheres of Influence” or Trade could be incorporated to handle these.

    In a free for all game of 5 players max, how will you handle a game with less than the max # of players?

    Nukes…these are a problem.

    Good choices, what do you thing about India as a major nation

    When players are not avalible to play certain major nations they wwillremain neutral until some one pays a certain amount of money an etemptto sway that non player major nation to their side, then they controll that nation until another player sways the non player major nation away from their side.

    Nukes, a problem maybe, I aactuallylike the idea of having super destructive weapons with unlimited range, not because a like games that end the first turn but because I like games that are realistic. I doubt that in the real world a war between to major powers with nuclear ccapabilities would result in nuclear war, most of the fighting would probable involve mass tank battle with air and naval mmissilesupport. Even if one side was losing, using nuclear missiles would make situation iinfinitelyworse for them and their enemy. The only real nuclear treat in the world to day is not from Iran or North Korea or any ccountryfor that matter, it is from a group of people who are insane, crazy, and uunreasonable that if they did got their hands on a nuke they would use it iimmediately
    Al-Queda
    I think this should be represented the game



  • I now have decided on six player nations
    US
    China
    Russia
    EU
    India
    Brazil

    Nations will be able to build four main types of military units
    Army’s
    Naives
    Airforce
    Nukes

    Certain locations on the map will have special graphics representing major cities and ports, and religious locations
    Optional rules could include a seventh player who acts as Al_Queda and other Islamic Terrorists

    I was also thinking about how you could spice up the economical side of the game buy moving different types of recourses I was thinking
    Capital
    Food
    Oil
    Weapons

    Feedback?


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

    spice up the economical side of the game buy moving different types of resources:

    OIL
    economic AID
    Military AID
      1) direct weapons
      2) advisors who help the nation get organized
    Technology AID
    diplomatic pressure ( this can be considered a currency of sorts)
    economic pressure ( same here)



    1. direct weapons
        2) advisors who help the nation get organise
      I like this Idea, although this aid would be given to countries in civil war.
      Okay I have a new Idea, see if you like it, instead of the game consisting of improbable wars between major countries in the world, what if it just mostly consisted of the major powers having proxy wars with one another. you could have multiply tactical maps which represent the geography of regions in the world like the:
      Middle East
      Central Asia
      Southwest Asia
      Korea
      Africa
      Latin America
      Then the major powers would send their units to these location and fight a war with anyone who whanted to challege them in that region.

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

  • 3
  • 14
  • 1
  • 27
  • 4
  • 3
  • 3
  • 6
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

55
Online

14.8k
Users

35.5k
Topics

1.4m
Posts