@mechanicsburg
If you are going to move often you should get into tripleA. U can play by email online. Find players on discord and try tons of different maps!

Grinchveld
Waterloo
Ontario Canada
HAS: D-Day and the 2004 global

2 Turn Rounds:
I am wondering if anyone has tried something like this.
Last game we had took 4 hours, so i am trying to let some slower players do stuff at the same time.

In any game with 5 powers,
(turn order USSR, GER, UK, Japan, USA)
it is possible for a round to be finished in 2 turns instead of 5 by letting each team move together.

Start the game as normal, for the first few rounds, when the UK player is ready, change the turn order so the UK goes after Japan.
(if your group thinks the UK needs some compensation feel free to give them 5 IPCs or if the UK has a 2nd factory place 1 infantry there before changing turn order)

Before the Japanese goes. (or whatever player gets to skip) the skipped player (UK) should get to do a non combat move for every unit closer to Japanese (territory or units) than to any axis powers. (Germany)

After the swap, The Allies can do most of their turns at the same time and so can the Axis.
Different powers still may not attack together.
If their are turns where one attack depends on a previous attack let the different powers do combat moves & resolve combat separately (but in order!)

You can have different combat rounds for the allied powers.

Allies:
COMBAT 1: (move and resolve) USA > Japan | UK > Ger
COMBAT 2: (move and resolve) RUS > Japan | USA > Ger
COMBAT 3: (move and resolve) UK > Japan | RUS > Ger

Axis:
COMBAT 1: (move and resolve) Japan > UK | GER > USA & USSR
COMBAT 2: (move and resolve) GER > UK | Japan > USA & USSR

Although if friendly powers are not fighting in the same territories you can ignore the separate combat steps and just make all your moves. (often applicable for the Axis)

Combat move and resolve are the only steps that get messy.
All the other turn phases can be done simultaneously, and this speeds up the game.

This also solves the problem of the USA not getting to collect from territories in China that go back and forth being fought over by Russia and Japan. A small thing that has bugged me an unreasonable amount! ;)

[warning: Idea stage. rules still being formed]
If anyone has played the small card game “air land sea” My idea is similar to that. In that game players constantly have the opportunity to cut their loses. This gives the losing player still meaningful decisions to make no matter how bad their hand is.

For Axis and Allies:
If after round 3 (or whatever) one side is losing enough they can concede the game. BUT the war goes on. The losers get some objectives. If they conceding side does well enough with those objectives, the game ends in a tie. This would allow players to still compete meaningfully, and give someone who thinks they have lost a new lease on life without having to clear the table/reset the board prematurely.

OBJECTIVE IDEAS:

1. War weariness? inflict enough casualties on the other side (thematic for USA or UK but not really for the others
2. Hold enough territory for the next 2 rounds
3. Hold enough Victory Cities for the next 2 rounds
4. Some negotiation track? Public opinion track?

Restrictions/Abilities Post Conceding?

1. After a side has conceded maybe they are allowed to build fortifications that are very strong
2. The conceding side is not allowed to attack any territory it did not start the game owning. And may only attack sea zones adjacent to those territories.

Hello,

I have the 2004 edition and would love to play some other versions. I have a few people locally but always excited to expand! Let me know if you’d care to Join us.

@ everyone

After thinking about this on and off for months I have come up with an idea that introduces zero new components!

No changing costs or stats. Instead change the casualties.

When picking casualties, you cannot pick the same unit type 3 times in a row. So instead of killing 3 inf you would kill 2 and the 3rd would have to be something else. And if no other units are left then u kill 2 inf on the 3rd hit every 3rd hit

@Veqryn

I am going to make this map! Looks really kool!

Anyone out there? I have the 1942 but open to trying other games

This Idea came up through talking to people here about avoiding infantry blobs. Spamming infantry is often the best way to play, but that can be boring. So to encourage more diversity in strategy, we came up with the following:

When taking Casualties, if you select the same unit type as a casualty 3 times in a row, you must take an extra casualty. So if you were defending with ONLY infantry and took 3 casualties, you must remove 4 infantry instead. [you may apply the same rule to all units or just infantry]

Players can adjust this to their liking. Every 4th unit must be different or even every 2nd unit must be different. I would love to play test this more online but not sure how to do that unless people use tabletop simulator.

Britian2.tsvg

britains turn. pbem did not work for me and idk why

[link text](![link url]([image url](```
link url

@SuperbattleshipYamato

thanks for helping improve the wording and structure!
Love this site

@SuperbattleshipYamato

you do have the correct idea. I also want to play a game out further while still having something to play for competitively instead of players just racking in the cash and killing them slowly and easily.

There is the problem of agreeing. I think it can be solved if we structured the bidding differently.

The Axis surrenders. Then players start betting how many rounds they can survive as the axis. that way you can keep bidding higher until one side accepts. They then must try to survive that many rounds.

I think the victory side should get to pick who bids 1st and both sides must bid higher each time.

Problem: One side thinks they are losing quite bad, doesn’t see a path to victory but feels bad quitting early. Other side would like to keep playing also.

Solution: The Surrender Bid! (edited)

0. at the end of a round one side may surrender

1. Players pick a number of victory cities/capitals that will decide a victory
   (if not decided at game beginning) If players cannot agree, play to a total victory.

2. Players bid how many rounds they can operate the surrendering side before losing.
   The goal for one side is to just stay alive for that many rounds and the other much achieve the victory conditions in that many rounds or less.

3. The side the accepted the surrender decides which side bids first. Each side must accept the bid or bid a higher number.

Say the Axis want to surrender, and it is a total victory Game. (this was agreed upon at the start)
The axis player offers a bid “If I control the Axis, I can hold off a total victory for 6 more rounds”
The allied player can accept OR bid higher. Keep bidding until one side accepts

If the Surrendering player wins the 2nd part of the game, it is a tie, if the Victor player wins the 2nd leg they achieve a double victory.

Axis and Allies has a scale problem, which is the nature of the beast when you try to put ww2 in a box.

A turn is supposed to represent several months, and in a single turn A bomber can fly from the UK and hit the Mediterranean sea sinking infinity transports

I do enjoy creative use of plans and figuring out weird flight paths, but it does give air power an insane ability.

historically/thematically, air power was more powerful when the bases were closer to the fight. (why fighters defend better than they attack) So could we have a feature where air power is reduced at greater ranges?

Some ides I have,
1)
Air Power uses 1 movement every time they don’t retreat. (let plains retreat, individually & separately whenever they want) my favourite but tricky to track
2)
Air power only stays for 1 or 2 rounds of combat unless they are adjacent
3)
Air power’s attack is reduced to the remaining movement the plains individually have

I’d like to see if there are other rules like this but i did not find them

@Veqryn

I am going to make this map! Looks really kool!

@Caesar1 sorry i lost the file, this thread is not easy for me to find the most current saves, naming them better would help

@Caesar1

i thought my turn was done. the latest save i had went to the USA but honestly if It is china, I am just turtling building mountain infantry until all my troops are dead

@Grinchveld

who is playing the USA?

USA.tsvg