We are on the wrong thread!!
Possible House Rule: One Extra Industrial Complex
I’m relatively new to the AA world, so forgive me if this concept has been posted about and/or beaten to death in the past, but while playing my fifth game I thought of a possible modification to the rules.
For some reason unknown to me and my friends, Avalon Hill decided to give us more than the necessary amount of industrial complex pieces (at least in my copy). I wonder, for those who have played more, and are more accustomed to the dynamics of AA, would it disrupt the game too much to allow each force one industrial complex to build in an area they so choose? My version of the house rule would read as follows:
Every force (Germany, Russia, UK, US) has the ability to place 1 additional Industrial Complex in addition to their existing complexes. To place a complex, a force must have control of a territory for at least 1 full turn, and on the PLACING phase of the next turn he/she may place an industrial complex. The extra complex may NOT be placed on turn zero. A fair price for the complex would be agreed upon, perhaps somewhere in the range of 20-30 IPCs. I was also considering a ‘building’ turn for the complex, i.e. you can place the complex if you’ve owned the territory for 1 full rotation, but you must also allow for another rotation to actually place resources at that complex. This way, opposition has one turn to conquer this territory (in which case the complex being constructed would be discarded from play). As usual, if a complex has been ‘completed’ and the territory it is in is conquered, control of the complex would pass to the conqueror.
My friends and I thought this may add a new dimension to the game, and make Northern Africa a much more valuable asset, to both Axis and Allies, because whoever gets there first has a clear advantage to either invade Russia or Germany. It could be used as a diversionary tactic, as well, to create the illusion of a future assault. We have not had the opportunity to play with this rule, so I hope more experienced players may provide insight, criticism and/or commentary. I’ve yet to truely think through this rule, so any amending/adjusting/tweaking is also welcome.
Extra ideas/amendments include:
- Must have at LEAST 3 (or more) INF present in the same territory during the entire ‘building’ phase (to actually build the damn thing)
- Can’t ‘start’ building a complex on turn 1, to ‘symbolize’ mobilization of the resources necessary to build it
- Can’t build on an island territory (Malta, Crete, etc.) to be fair to allies
- (Or better yet) Can’t build on a territory with no industrial production value (for example, Vyborg)
- The entire Alliance gets only one extra complex, instead of each force getting one
Any input/suggestions/critique/criticism is appreciated!
cystic crypt last edited by
i’ve thought about trying this out myself. It would be interesting to see what could be done in this regard. Poland NEEDS an IC, as does the Caucusus
I think this rule needs careful consideration. Without the correct consideration and parameters of the rule, it could prove to be very bad. I think what it ultimately needs at this point is actual ingame testing, something which I am unable to do (right now, I play on weekends). During my first post I actually went over it more than I had before, so now I have a more refined version:
Both the Axis and Allies have the option to place one additional Industrial Complex, each, in addition to pre-existing complexes (1 for Axis, 1 for Allies). The following stipulations apply:
1. The additional complex CANNOT be placed on turn zero.
2. The additional complex must be placed on a territory controlled by the placing side for at least one full turn rotation, and it will be placed during the normal placing phase (at the end of the turn).
3. At LEAST 4 INF must be present in the territory in which the additional complex is being placed during the ENTIRE turn it is placed.
4. The additional complex CANNOT be placed on a territory with no industrial production value (i.e., Vyborg).
5. When an additional complex is placed, it cannot be used for the period of one full rotation, to symbolize the actual building phase of it.
6. If the territory in which the additional complex is placed is overthrown by opposition during the ‘building’ turn, the complex is discarded from play, and the placing side loses their additional complex.
7. As normal, if the complex is ‘finished’ and the territory in which it is placed is overthrown, it passes to the control of the conqueror (it can’t be bombed, it must be taken by ground forces).
8. In all other respects the additional complex is placed as all other units, at the cost of 30 IPCs (negotiable).
While this may seem complex, it really isn’t. Like I said in my previous post, it would add a whole new dimension to the game, and give players much more options. It could be used to secure a secondary base in northern Africa or the Middle East, or it could be used as a diversionary tactic, etc. Send all comments/questions/arguments, etc - they are greatly appreciated.
Hey there fyrwurxx, have youse guys found this a compelling addition to the game? I mean, there seemed to be plenty of thought behind it – I’m curious how it plays out, affects strategies, outcomes, etc.
Yuor rules are almost exacty the rules for building IC’s in the original AA game. There the IC’s cost 15, can only be built on a territory you have held since the beginning of the turn, and require an additional turn before building at that location.
The only other addition is that a purchased IC can only build the number of units that the territory is worth.