Armor values

@nuno:

Armours at 3/3 don’t foster the practice of high level strategy.
Transports with transport capability of an armour plus an infantry each, also don’t.
Two reasons among others
why success in Revised is less likely to represent high quality strategy.
Thus is less interesting and a disapointment from a competitive point of view.

I would think the opposite. you excatly get some startgry to buying units.

To perhaps address historical differences you could do this:

Start with American, Soviet, British and Japanese tanks at 3/2 and all tanks built in the future by soviets and America at 3/3 ( use Milton Bradley tanks for 3/2).
Japanese and British tanks stay at 3/2 costs 5 for entire game

Also, German tanks cost 6 but attack at 4/3 these apply to starting tanks as well as built tanks. The Germans can build one 4/4 tank per turn also at 6 (representing SS Panzerkorps)

American tanks still cost 5 and are 3/3

My suggestion would be this: consider only Soviet starting tanks 3-3 to represent the huge and virtually indestructible KV1s. Germany only applies 3-3 to new tanks built after the opening turn, the western Allies never.

@Imperious:

To perhaps address historical differences you could do this:

Start with American, Soviet, British and Japanese tanks at 3/2 and all tanks built in the future by soviets and America at 3/3 ( use Milton Bradley tanks for 3/2).
Japanese and British tanks stay at 3/2 costs 5 for entire game

Also, German tanks cost 6 but attack at 4/3 these apply to starting tanks as well as built tanks. The Germans can build one 4/4 tank per turn also at 6 (representing SS Panzerkorps)

American tanks still cost 5 and are 3/3

Thats a good idea, the only problom I see is keeping trac of them all.

I have always played Europe and Pacific for that matter with revised unit values. Carrier 16,Tanks defend on 3,fighters 10. Maybe because I got AAR first. I don’t think that it unbalances the game with the defend 3. I find it is definitely easier to win with Revised as the axis then in AAR.

IPC Startoff
AAR
Allies-96IPC
Axis- 70IPC
=26 IPC initial advantage

AAE
Allies-89IPC
Axis-40
=49 IPC initial Advantage.

Can anyone tell me why they changed the fg value from 12-10 IC in AAR-AAE?

I think they reduced the IPC amount and defense value for tanks to encourage different unit purchases. Not all inf and subs.

@Gewehr:

Can anyone tell me why they changed the fg value from 12-10 IC in AAR-AAE?

“Players didn’t purchase fighters as often as we wanted. Now they’re a better buy, so they’re more likely to be purchased.”

(From my Revised Box)

And maybe… they are right.

@nuno:

@Gewehr:

Can anyone tell me why they changed the fg value from 12-10 IC in AAR-AAE?

They didn’t know how handle those numbers to accurately emulate WWII battles/tactics…Thus the route followed from 2nd Edition, instead of improving such emulation, screwd up/decreased it…AARevised is a step backwards in WWII battle/tactic/strategy emulation.
It was a Revision for worse(though there are few improvements).

can you please explain how its a step backwards.

I feel a good emulation/simulation should model the usefulness of air units in WWII.

For power vs. IPC air units is a bad purchase.
By reducing the cost of the fighter the benefits of an air unit can show a tad better.

Yes sales is important at the end of the day.
Revised is for age 12+ so they can’t make it too complicated.

But for us, just create house rules to your tastes. Introducing air combat rules for example can add much dynamics to land combat.