Condensed 'Bring-me-up-to-speed' information?

IMO using real WWII rationale for China VS Japan does not compute in Axis and Allies because A&A does not use terrain. The #1 reason Japan did not take all of China in the real war was because of terrain. South West China is all mountains. North West China is dessert that is the second largest desert in the world. Also that desert is a nightmare scenario in winter. There is also this huge mountain chain coming up the west side of the China that is ignored.

SO

If you want to change up the status quo in China in respect to Japan I would offer this. Using game mechanics in the game.

You use Impassible territories.

You put up a Impassible territory between Khazashistan and Novobirisk. The only way Japan can get into Russia then is to invade Timguska.  So, you now force Japan to focus on the north which brings into play the Russia far east forces to resist them. It also forces Japan to diffuse their air power to the north. Which then brings up a choice Japan has to make. Go north with air power and leave India to build up and resist Japan.

I’ve settled on my house rules (for now) and so I’m going to release my files for a free download for anyone that’s interested in using them or even just checking them out to get some ideas for your own set. The link to download them is at;
http://www.mediafire.com/file/mucfl9jol75ujl9/GHG_House_Rules.zip

I also made a video with my house rule set that I use and the copy that I have sent to Young Grasshopper to put on the prize table at the Grasshopper Invitational coming up. It gives a summary of all of my house rules with a quick explanation of each as well as a close look at the units and markers. You can see the video here;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCWswdQL-rw

Just finished a game with the Europe only setup. Had to make a few modifications (changed the artillery piece in Paris to a tank and the artillery in Western Germany to a mech; pulled a few subs/tanks from my 1941 game) due to the Germany setup requiring more pieces than the game comes with. Other than that, had an absolute blast, definitely seemed balanced. Thanks.

@Baron:

Hope UK Pacific new turn order will help smooth the game flow.
Do you intend to merge it with ANZAC when you have less players around the table?

I don’t think so, the group loves the speed of the game with the separate UK nations… but they want something a little closer to oob rules. Also, it’s believed that the new victory objectives help balance the game the way a combined UK Pacific and ANZAC combo once did. It still needs a few tweeks to the NOs.

@Red:

The last boats that I would think of making a ramming attack in the WWII era would be capital ships, particularly undamaged capital ships.  Big ships were stand off weapons (aircraft carriers and battleships.)  Unless there is a long/mid range combat phase followed by a short range naval combat phase I don’t see how the attack roll would work conceptually.

An excellent point.  Using big ships as rams rather than as long-range weapon platforms would be roughly in the same league (though slightly more credible) than bringing them alongside an enemy ship so that the crew – armed with pistols and cutlasses, if their captain is a traditionalist – could board it.  The British captain who came closest to carrying on this tradition during WWII was (as I recall) Captain Vian of HMS Cossack (a destroyer), who led a boarding party over to the German supply ship Altmark and freed its POWs with the dashing remark (addressed towards the ship’s holds), “Any British down there?  Well, come on up – the Navy’s here!”

@Sergente_nella_neve:

Oh, i’m sorry, excuse me!

In effect i forgot to specify that this rule doesn’t have effect for territories that already have an IC on it.

And you’re right, Germany can mobilize new units faster, but USSR too…

But Russia is already building in the Caucasus (in Revised) anyway, if the front is in Ukraine, then this really doesn’t help the Russians nearly as much as the Germans.

Its only a dream.  :-(

@theduke:

that sounds like 2nd or 3rd edition rules (i.e. “original” axis and allies), not 1st edition. are you sure? i’m taking about the very 1st edition… an edition basically no one plays anymore.

The 1st ed was w/ unlimited IC’s.  Even ones you purchased.

Very unbalanced b/c GBR would get an IC for Persia, and move all of the India units to Sinkiang to allow US to buy the IC on the first round.  Round 2 and beyond sees $ 60+/turn worth of allied armor pouring onto the Eurasia landmass to take everything over.