• OK somewhere in this place I saw a House Rule suggesting infantry can be placed in any home territory with a Victory City (without the need for a IC) up to the IPC value of that territory.

    Now I’m liking the idea since it reflects the Commonwealth perspective better than the deal UK currently gets….

    BUT do I have any volunteers to be the Japanese Recruiting Officer in Shanghai?!?  :-o
    Even the Maytag repairman isn’t as lonely!

    And Honolulu… once we exclude the guys already in uniform how many times can we dip into that population and make surfers into soldiers?

    Anyway, although I’m not a big NA fan… I’m thinking of limiting it to Ottawa, Calcutta and Sydney.

    Whatcha think?

  • Customizer

    My maps have recruitment depots for just this thing.  They are only placed in areas likely to produce regular recruits (Honolulu should NOT be a VC), and of course the draft is limited each turn to the IPC value of the territory.  They are extended beyond VCs to any viable area, and sometimes can be used by both sides (for example Germany AND Russia have limited recruitment in Ukraine).

    It should be noted that Japan is at a big disadvantage here, as it had few combat troops from outside Japan itself, while the Allies built whole armies from India, Australia and Siberia and smaller units from Brazil.


  • I explain these game quirks via my idea of “Invisible shipping”
    Obviously merchant marine shipping isnt represented in A&A, why would it. Excluding convy zones we just assume that the IPCs of a territory (its raw materials) mysteriously reach the capitol and turn into guns, tanks, boats…etc.

    It is not so hard to imagine that cities such as Sidney, Hong Kong, and Paris have enough infastructure and trade by sea, air, and rail, coming in and out of their territories that they can recieve at least enough equipment to arm an infantry division, including arriving men.

    So on Hawaii, its not the 122nd Hawaiian regement, its just some men and materials transported to hawaii by transports, transports we dont see. And even if there wouldnt be a safe route to that territory, (japanese blocade) there is at least one or two infantry  divisions worth of cooks, mechanics, and civilians in somewhere as large as a victory city to press into service.

    My house rule allows a power to build 1 infantry at 1 VC per turn if it wishes, up to a maximum of 6 total units (including allied units) So india, and Australia cant become stacks of 100 men.


  • And this hinges on the criteria for a Victory City… some were chosen for strategic impact (value if captured) and may not reflect infrastructure or population.


  • If a territory contains a victory city……im sure there is at least enough infastructure avalable to a major power to equip a division of infantry.

    Paris may be just a trophy for hitler, but im willing to bet enough rail lines run towards it to muster up a division of vichy french or some such. Likewise if Russia has poland, there is enough raw anti-german sentiment around to draft up some partisans.

    The city itself isnt producing the infantry, the territory is just on a level of interconnetion with that powers ‘home base’ so to speak, that getting a division or so there every once in a while is possible. Hong Kong for example was a major port, japanese vessels sent to pick up raw materials could drop of some guns and ammo while they were there, perhaps even some men to go with them. Viola, one infantry…the maximum allowed per turn.

    (On a rules development note, perhaps infantry placed this way should cost 4 IPC’s
    or the ammount of units in the territory may not exceed the territory’s value after placement, or perhaps doubble the territories value.) now youve got me thinking…


  • All of these ideas are located in AARHE. You might as well copy and paste those ideas here to save you the trouble.

    In every respect this is exactly what AARHE is about.


  • @Imperious:

    All of these ideas are located in AARHE. You might as well copy and paste those ideas here to save you the trouble.

    In every respect this is exactly what AARHE is about.

    So AARHE says that the British can generate inf from Ottawa but the Japanese cannot from Shanghai?


  • It displays increased costs for placement at captured VC, vs originally held VC and allows for both.

    It even adjusts the cost based on the 1st infantry built, the 2nd, 3rd etc… To account for realistic manpower shortages.

    Of course in some situations it may not be possible for Japan to find many willing soldiers to fight her enemies if she should be able to occupy Canada, but if Japan ever took out eastern Canada, the game would be over anyway.


  • @Imperious:

    It displays increased costs for placement at captured VC, vs originally held VC and allows for both….
    Of course in some situations it may not be possible for Japan to find many willing soldiers to fight her enemies if she should be able to occupy Canada, but if Japan ever took out eastern Canada, the game would be over anyway.

    Well I wasn’t envisioning anything as farflung as the Japanese recruiting in BC. IMO thinking not many Chinese in Shanghai would be enlisting.
    So is Shanghai treated as captured VC or an originally-held VC?


  • Well the map is not accurate in this respect, but Shanghai would be Japanese original. If it was up to me the VC should be in Manchukuo and that other territory held in Chinese control in 1941. Sometimes you have to just do the best of a bad situation.

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 27
  • 28
  • 12
  • 5
  • 11
  • 2
  • 10
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

98

Online

17.3k

Users

39.8k

Topics

1.7m

Posts