Welcome! If you're a returning member of the forums, please reset your password. If you don't receive an email within minutes, it means your account is listed under another, likely older, email address. Contact webmaster@axisandallies.org for help.

The Big 7: New National Objectives


  • '14

    OK so I’m sure Imperious Leader will move this thread in short order, but I wanted to get everyone thinking about the new National Objectives concept that has been introduced in AA50, and how this might be used as an alternative to bidding.

    😄

    Basically Larry has given us a way to re-balance the game (should we want to) by tweaking the cash via NOs. Instead of doing what we usually do, establishing a bid and writing new house rules, we can now effect income directly using an officially sanctioned system - the National Objectives system, which Larry has given us.

    Its a good framework and easy enough to understand, so there’s no reason it couldn’t be expanded to improve game balance. I think we should come up with 7 National Objectives (one for each player, including China) which could be designed to improve the Two-Front style of gameplay. Nobody knows yet how the Out of Box set up will shake down, but eventually someone will hit on the best strats and show us what the prevailing patterns are. If they prove too ahistorical or one dimensional, then we could use these 7 NOs to bring them back into balance again.

    I don’t know what they should be yet, or what types of gameplay will emerge in the coming months, but it would be cool to have some ideas in place on AA.org. Uniformity and simplicity is the ticket, which why I think we should restrict ourselves to just one NO for each player.

    More Naval National Objectives would be cool, or one for Germany at least.

    What ideas sound cool to everyone else?



  • Good thought Black Elk.

    Several ideas for a Naval NO for Germany.  Perhaps to make room for it, remove the Karelia/Caucaus NO.

    1. For every one of the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) in which there is at least 1 Axis Sub, Germany receives +1 IPCs during the Collect Income phase.
      I would rather this be received at the beginning of Germany’s turn so that the Allies have a chance to nullify it, or for this to be minus IPCs from UK or US, but doing it in this way fits it into the current NO system.

    2. If Germany controls at least 3 Subs total within the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) at any time, then all German subs within those sea zones are +1 Attack and +1 Defense.

    3. If the Axis control Iceland, then all German Subs within the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) are +1 Attack and +1 Defense, Germany may place up to 1 Sub per turn in sea zone #2, and Germany collects +2 IPCs during the Collect Income phase.

    4. If there is a German Battleship in at least one of the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, or 12), then, in those same sea zones, no UK/US transports may move during the combat phase, and no UK/US surface warships may move except to attack or move toward the Battleship.  (This NO is a little strange, but this replays the sinking of the Bismark, which was a very historical event.)



  • Germany: Gain 5 IPC if no allies naval units are in SZ 5 and axis control of Norway and Finland
    -this gives a reason to build a fleet without outright forcing it, and gives the allies another way of slowing down the Germans, perhaps even the Russians.

    Italy: Gain 10 IPC if axis control Union of South Africa
    -very difficult to get, but huge cash bonus, perhaps only 5 IPC? i’m not really sure what Italy was doing in the war other than getting beat up.

    Japan: Gain 5 IPC if axis control Yakut(?!)
    -not sure where the oil fields were, but there was a group in japan that wanted to attack Russia, it is already very difficult to go the northern route and hit Russia, and this gives them more options/choices in the early game.

    US: Gain 5 IPC if allies SBR Japan this round
    -was a huge boost in allied moral, not sure if this should be in or not as it breaks the mold of ‘hold a territory’.
    ALT US: Gain 5 IPC if allies control Caroline islands
    -was a large japan naval base there, just like the location because it would give UK 5 extra IPCs as well if not retaken and is smack dab in the middle of the ocean, only one turn from the US coast as well.

    Russia: Gain 5 IPC if allies control Manchuria
    -there was fighting along there, and it would make japan think twice about leaving it wide open on T1. Not sure though.

    UK: Gain 5 IPC if no axis ships are in SZ 5, 13, 14, 16 (maybe add 35, 39, 47, maybe remove 5, perhaps just the SZ around the capital?)
    -it was extremely important for the UK to control the sea.

    These may be horrible, or they may be decent, but I tried.



  • Here is a NO that I thought up for China.

    At the beginning of the US turn, if China controls less than 5 of its 9 territories (That’s less than 50%.) then during the Purchase Units phase, China receives 1 Infantry for each territory it controls to be placed during the Place Units phase instead of 1 Infantry for each 2 territories which it controls. Also, any 1 US Fighter which lands on a Chinese territory this turn may be converted into a Chinese Fighter subject to the same rules as other Chinese units.  Once converted, this unit may never be converted back to US control.



  • How about a little extra income for the USA to get them into the pacific!

    1. Every turn the USA has at least 1 more AC in the Pacific than Japan they gain 8 IPC’s.
    2. Each time the USA destroys a Japanese capitol ship (BB,AC) they get 5 IPC’s.
    3. Every turn the USA starts with 5 or more transports in the Pacific they gain 5 IPC’s.
    4. The USA gets a 1 time 10 IPC bonus for the Industrial bombing of Toyko.

    Just a few quick thoughts on how to get the USA into the Pacific.



  • @Bardoly:

    Good thought Black Elk.

    Several ideas for a Naval NO for Germany.  Perhaps to make room for it, remove the Karelia/Caucaus NO.

    1. For every one of the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) in which there is at least 1 Axis Sub, Germany receives +1 IPCs during the Collect Income phase.
      I would rather this be received at the beginning of Germany’s turn so that the Allies have a chance to nullify it, or for this to be minus IPCs from UK or US, but doing it in this way fits it into the current NO system.

    2. If Germany controls at least 3 Subs total within the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) at any time, then all German subs within those sea zones are +1 Attack and +1 Defense.

    3. If the Axis control Iceland, then all German Subs within the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) are +1 Attack and +1 Defense, Germany may place up to 1 Sub per turn in sea zone #2, and Germany collects +2 IPCs during the Collect Income phase.

    4. If there is a German Battleship in at least one of the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, or 12), then, in those same sea zones, no UK/US transports may move during the combat phase, and no UK/US surface warships may move except to attack or move toward the Battleship.  (This NO is a little strange, but this replays the sinking of the Bismark, which was a very historical event.)

    Are the attack and defense bonuses for 2 and 3 cumulative?  And are they cumulative with super subs?

    Mwahahahaha….



  • Have a good onethat shoudl of been in the game, it really should of

    If allied powers control Burma and the chinese territory above it, chinese gets 1 extra free inf

    hard, i know, but still…



  • @Comassion:

    @Bardoly:

    Good thought Black Elk.

    Several ideas for a Naval NO for Germany.  Perhaps to make room for it, remove the Karelia/Caucaus NO.

    1. For every one of the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) in which there is at least 1 Axis Sub, Germany receives +1 IPCs during the Collect Income phase.
      I would rather this be received at the beginning of Germany’s turn so that the Allies have a chance to nullify it, or for this to be minus IPCs from UK or US, but doing it in this way fits it into the current NO system.

    2. If Germany controls at least 3 Subs total within the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) at any time, then all German subs within those sea zones are +1 Attack and +1 Defense.

    3. If the Axis control Iceland, then all German Subs within the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12) are +1 Attack and +1 Defense, Germany may place up to 1 Sub per turn in sea zone #2, and Germany collects +2 IPCs during the Collect Income phase.

    4. If there is a German Battleship in at least one of the following sea zones (1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, or 12), then, in those same sea zones, no UK/US transports may move during the combat phase, and no UK/US surface warships may move except to attack or move toward the Battleship.  (This NO is a little strange, but this replays the sinking of the Bismark, which was a very historical event.)

    Are the attack and defense bonuses for 2 and 3 cumulative?  And are they cumulative with super subs?

    Mwahahahaha….

    The thought was that 1 of these NOs (1-3) would replace the capture Karelia/Caucaus NO.
    The #4 NO would not really be a NO, it would just be a special rule to use.
    Yes the Attack bonus would be cummulative with Super Subs.



  • USA is too weak production wise

    -Gain 15 ipcs if at the end of your turn the value of all American units in Pacific theatre are more than 90 ipcs,not including ICs or AA guns.
    (Pacific theatre includes…Alaska, all pacific islands and Pacific ocean)If you really think about it the American people would have been furious if we had not fought Japan after PH. If we are not engaging them then morale should be low and no bonus should be given. This would also get America to its ideal ipc level.

    -Gain 5 ipcs if Allied powers control Phillipines

    The other 2 NOs are deleted. All American NOs focused on Pacific. If you don’t fight in Pacific you get no bonus.

    Yes, this is from “How to balance the 1941 scenerio” thread. I still think this would work. It fixes a couple of things…
    1. You are actually fighting in the Pacific. Come to think of it I think that is what actually happened in the REAL war. Crazy, I know.
    2. This gets the US to a more realistic income level. We want it to be more historical right?
    3. This level of income for US can let them fight in BOTH theaters. Kind of important when we are thinking historical.
    4. With the US breathing down Japan’s neck it keeps the Japs out of Russia(theoretically anyway). It also helps the weak representation of China(only getting a few infantry).


  • 2018 2017 2016 '11 Moderator

    How about America gets the ability to launch bombers from aircraft carriers. (They cannot land on the carriers, but they can launch from them.)

    This ability is only available in the Pacific and if at any time the American fleet is stronger in the atlantic than in the pacific, it is lost for the duration of the game. (Fighters are air assets, not naval assets, even on aircraft carriers.)


Log in to reply
 

Welcome to the new forums! For security and technical reasons, we did not migrate your password. Therefore to get started, please reset your password. You may use your email address or username. Please note that your username is not your display name.

If you're having problems, please send an email to webmaster@axisandallies.org

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 3
  • 9
  • 37
  • 4
  • 8
  • 38
  • 25
  • 2
I Will Never Grow Up Games

81
Online

12.9k
Users

33.1k
Topics

1.3m
Posts