AARHE: Spending & Saving IPCs

Bienvenue au forum!  There’s been a similar question asked here…

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41247.0

…so as a starting point you could have a look at that discussion thread, which may provide part of the answer to your question.

I personally have more than one way to “win” the game for each side.

Axis -

Economic Victory - The Axis powers make 150 IPC’s combined
Total Victory - The Axis powers control all Allied Capitals
Victory Objectives - The Axis powers have 5 Victory Objectives
VC Victory - The Axis powers control 12 Victory Cities or the OOB rules

Allies -

Economic Victory - The Allied powers make 200 IPC’s combined
Total Victory - OOB Rules
Victory Objectives - The Allied powers have 5 Victory Objectives
VC Victory - The Allied powers control 16 Victory Cities

World Domination is also a possibility, one we play when we have time.

USSR: 42 (Russia worth 8, Caucasus and Vologda worth 6, Karelia and Novosibirsk worth 4, Archangel and Kazakh worth 3, Okrug, Yakut, Far East, and Buryatia worth 2
Germany: 40
UK: 24 (UK and India worth 6, Egypt and Australia worth 2, South Africa, Trans-Jordan, Western and Eastern Canada, Burma, New Zealand, Gibraltar, and Persia worth 1
Japan: 30
USA: 30 (Eastern and Western USA are worth 10, Central worth 6, Mexico and Panama worth 2)

Allows the USSR to hammer Germany and Japan. USA and UK are weaker to represent slower mobilization times. Also forces Allies to ensure USSR survives, or perish.

I for one hate the notion of zero IPC territories altogether. Regardless of where they are on the map.

I would be in favor of doubling the value of all territories, making 0 IPC tts worth 1

Right now most nations income is much inferior to their production capabilities, ICs are sometimes a rare purchase

Doubling the IPC values of all territories would swap this, nations would have insufficient factories to start the game, and would likely purchase additional ICs and/or upgrade the ones they star with
You would obviously have much more units on the board, but this I believe would lead to less board space being ignored for large portions of the game
Battles would also average out better with regards to dice rolling

Just giving a possible solution and arguments for it :)
It may be a terrible one, but it’s more feasible for F2F games with marking all over the map

@Gargantua:

Also… the research facility cost the same as all the other facilities for simplicity sake (15), not that it’s a huge deal…  and they also operated the same (built in AA, up to 6 damage, operable at 2 or less damage).

I think handing out free research facilities at the beginning of the game may make things very tech heavy, but I understand the need to get some of the smaller nations involved. I suggest a price ladder for multiple facilities…

1st Lab = $5
2nd Lab = $10
3rd Lab = $20
4th Lab = $40
5th Lab = $80
6th Lab = $160

This way, 1st Labs are practically free for UK, Russia, Italy, and India, but there is still a small risk for having one. It also makes nations who want more research rolls, to pay accordingly for them. I would still like to see ANZAC, France, and China ineligible, however, I like your idea of an invading nation choosing to steal a tech by destroying the captured facility, or keeping it for themselves, it solves some issues when capturing.

I could be mistaken… but Purchasing TECH, might actually come BEFORE the repair units phase… in which case, a bombed facility, wouldn’t be able to roll for tech - until AFTER repairs, and a turn where it isn’t damaged again.

Don’t we want players to spend for repairs, roll for research, and purchase developed weapons all in the same turn?

I’m not too keen on changing the troop values for the various countries.  I think having their ipcs go to the controlling nation is enough.

You bring up a good point about the allies attacking neutrals, but these rules are really about bringing more options to both sides rather than taking them away.  I have no problem making Historical Sacrifices provided it results in improved  game play and fun.  I’m just looking for simple, perhaps a short paragraph, to give the rules for various Neutrals.

Back to Sweden.  I maintain the greatest fear the Swede’s had was Communism.  When Stalin attacked Finland they sent support to them.  They allowed transit rights to the Germans so they could fight the Russians.  I am sure they were entertaining thoughts about joining the allies in order to keep the Russians out of invading Scandinavia.  Even if these things are not true, I am leaning towards rules that follow the ‘evil communism’ spirit.

Perhaps giving Germany the option to activate Sweden when the time comes is best?  Germany can then look at the on board situation and decide if Sweden being activated is wise, or if it is just giving that territory to Russia.  I am thinking this would not be a round after round decision though, Germany gets 1 shot at Sweden.

I’m still thinking the 2 dollar Russians are unbeatable.  unless they are 1-1 or 0-2 or something.

Bring in all the mec/arm combinations and double supporting artillery you want.  at 37 IPC’s a turn, I’m putting 18 men on the board each round.  Germany is not going to be able to do anything about that.

Oh and lets not forget, once I have a fat stack, if things don’t look good, I can call in the Russian winter, and defend with a $2 unit at 3 or less.

replace
“its income cannot be spent in other territories.
That income and only that income can be spent in its IC or VC during purchase units phase this turn.
That income is forfeited if not spent this turn.”

with
“The blockaded territory’s income can only be spent in its own VC or IC. Income from other territories may not be spent in the blockaded territory’s VC or IC.
If the blockade territory’s income is not spent this turn it is forfeited.”