I think you could just announce that it’s a recon force and which ships would be passing through if it succeeds… maybe put the recon force into the territory for combat and the rest of the fleet could be put on the line between the territories until combat is resolved.  If the recon force takes out the blockers in the first round of combat, the ships on the line could then pass through the territory or use their shore bombardment in the territory: but the recon force could not pass through with them and could not bombard with them (they would be out of position, expended munitions, etc.).  If the recon force fails to take out the blockers, then the remaining ships may join the combat or they could stay in the previous zone and either way can’t pass through or bombard the shore.  The recon force would then have to continue to engage in regular combat or retreat.

OK HBG global - I see it now…

OK. Comment noted.
Don’t be afraid about numbers, they will be much less present since they found a way to be applied in a Triple A Redesign game.

I will try to refrained myself to not overflow too much threads.

For language difference, maybe someday it will improve…

Because the western Allies can more easily project power and gang up against Japan or Germany, while the axis are too far apart to help each other. Italy is really not much help. They can pile up in Spain and really easily make that a base to attack France, or even do a 2 to 1 in France. Go play it and find out. I did a few times over the years.

Hopefully I can remember enough to add a quick finish to this after all this time.  Basically, Churchill’s morale was broken after England fell and realizing the mistake of thinking India’s IPC’s were England’s, so he went off to play cards.  Roosevelt took over control of all of the remaining Commonwealth nations and military forces.  Stalin still felt optimistic that he could push back the Germans.

The following summarizes R4+5 (I think it was 5 rounds at least)

Japan and the US clashed around the Caroline Islands in what was the largest naval battle of the game.  Japanese battleships Yamato, Musashi, and Nagato joined the carriers Zuikaku, Shokaku, and the Kaga complete with full loads of Tony, Oscar, and Zero fighters as well as Kate and Val bombers along with 5 destroyers against a multinational fleet consisting of US and Royal Naval forces lead by the “Big E”, the USS Enterprise loaded with Wildcat fighters and Dauntless bombers (still in their 1940 pre-war livery), the carrier USS Lexington with a Wildcat fighter group and Devastator bombers all in Battle of Midway camouflage, 5 DD’s, a sub and a bunch of transports, with the BB USS West Virginia not able to join the battle in time. The overwhelming Japanese force was successful, with the bulk of their forces surviving with battleships damaged.  Encountering success everywhere, they also wiped out the last remaining Chinese resistance.  On the follow up turn, an Australian tank corp raced across the country to defeat the sneaky Japanese and their infantry unit’s beached was eliminated.  The few surviving Mongolian troops and the Allied powers had little to celebrate.

Roosevelt took huge morale blows with Churchill’s resignation and now this catastrophic naval loss, but he was still hanging in there by a thread.  The Japanese were pretty much the masters of mainland Asia.

In Europe, Iraqi soldiers were charging towards India, backed by their Italian friends.  Germany kept pressing towards Russia.  They bought another carrier and a Destroyer to further intimidate the Americans, who were still equally distributing their money to each front, with some money left over given to land units to maintain parity with Stalin, with the idea of spending everything to land units against Russia on the following turn.  Italy steamed the Battleship Littorio, a cruiser, DDs, and subs past the “Pillars of Hercules” to further intimidate the Americans from making a move.  The naval intimidation moves succeeded on Roosevelt who decided to capitulate as he didn’t want to dare move the US fleet in range of all of those Axis ships, especially given all of the airpower that could support them.  Stalin tried to convince him to fight on, but after the demoralizing Pacific defeat, he didn’t have the heart to see the USS Ranger, California, and Arizona at the bottom of the sea (yes, the USS Arizona was stationed on the East Coast for this alternative history).  The Allies were essentially defeated and it was game over.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eWPStTU4pgFqS3rN8NnCtVlTJzmcFZnSHA
Pacific after the Allies capitulated

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Htmx1y4AuE4X81l1iBdf0bU8wiABqjiTxQ
Europe after the Allies capitulated

I’m betting this variant is not balanced, but there were so many mistakes and the skill level was so unbalanced between the Axis and Allies, that it’s hard to say that it favors the Axis.  It seemed like Sea Lion wouldn’t have worked with England collecting the proper income and making more strategic decisions such as supporting with Canadian troops and not scrambling all of their air force in the initial attacks.  The drawback of simultaneous play was that the newer players couldn’t be monitored as well as when play is one country at a time.  Perhaps playing one country at a time for the first round may be the way to go when there are new players, so they can be watched and have their questions answered.

Just in case. I made a saved game of this setup for TripleA 1942.2, WWII V5.
There is 2 ICs in China, it needs to be Player enforced so you can only produce Infantry on it. This is to simulate Chinese militia build up from AA50.

So, you can make a few Triple A playtests before playing table top.

1941AA50_SETUP_WW2V5_Russia1.tsvg

If you and/or your friend are really upset about the loss of the original MB A&A tech chart, pretty sure that method and chart are still 100% compatible with the current 1942.2 game if you really wanted it (I’m not talking about game-balance, but mechanically speaking, it would still work).

The old method was spend 5 IPCs per die you wanted to roll… if you spent 20 IPCs, that’s four die rolls. You’d roll the dice… each result of “6” was a breakthrough and you’d then reroll for each breakthrough and apply it to this chart:

Jet Power (fighters defend at 5) Rockets (1 rocket attack on enemy industry a turn for any AAA within 3 spaces of an enemy Plant… 1D6 IPC loss to enemy) Super Subs (subs attack at 3) Long Range aircraft (all aircraft have 2 more range) Industrial Technology (all units are 1 IPC less) Heavy Bombers (all bombers roll 3 dice instead of 1… note this essentially ended the game… lol).

If it’s really a big deal to you guys, all the above rules would work mechanically with A&A 1942.2… however, not all are balanced, especially Heavy Bombers, but that could be changed (maybe roll 3 dice and choose your favorite of the three).

There’s lots of custom rules for tech research… its not hard to either add the original rules, use someone elses posted on the forum, or just make up your own house rules. In any case, this is one of the easiest rules to add back into the game if you really miss it.

AandAtech.jpg

Thanks! I mostly agree with your comment about per-dice research efficiency; the only reason I didn’t include additional penalties for triple-stacking your scientists is for the sake of simplicity. If you want to play with a -3 penalty, or (even better) a -4 penalty that rounds up to a -3 penalty if you roll three 1’s, then go right ahead!

Giving each Axis nation 3 tokens and each Allied nation 2 tokens tends to give the Axis an early edge in research (they will manage their first couple of breakthroughs earlier than the Allies will), but then the Allies will start to catch up and then overtake the Axis later in the war, because the Axis scientists (on average) will be more “crowded” and will take more stacking penalties.

You could bump Radar to 14 pts. or even to 16 pts. if you really want to, but there are limited opportunities to make full use of the potential synergy. E.g., suppose Germany is using a “Dark Skies” approach to ward off Allied fleets with its enormous Nazi bomber squadrons. Britain might want both Radar and Anti-Aircraft Cruisers to help protect its fleet. Russia, on the other hand, only needs Radar – they’re not going to build any cruisers. Similarly, Russia doesn’t have much use for Jet Fighters, since if it’s suffering from a strategic bombing campaign, it won’t be able to afford much in the way of extra fighters. There’s also the concern that “Heavy Bombers” has always been an overpowered technology in every version of Axis & Allies that had tech. I tried to err in the opposite direction by making the anti-aircraft techs roughly as powerful as the aircraft-enhancement techs!

There is an “Improved Artillery” tech in some of the OOB versions of Axis & Allies, and I’ve never seen anyone buy it, except maybe Russia, who really does have to count every dollar and might not be able to afford enough artillery to fully power its infantry stacks. It is really challenging to fully exploit the advantage of 2:1 artillery support is that it’s really hard to maintain the desired ratio. E.g. if I have a stack of 10 infantry and 5 artillery, then after one round of combat, I probably have something like 2 infantry and 5 artillery, and the extra artillery support becomes moot. It stays moot on defense, too, when those artillery try to hold the ground they just captured. But if I have a stack of 20 infantry and 5 artillery instead, then my army is hugely inefficient – even with 2:1 artillery support, I’m only generating 40 pips of punch on 25 units, so I’m going to give you multiple rounds of combat in which to score hits and wear down my army.

You get the same problem in reverse if you want to only boost the artillery’s native attack power. With a stack of, e.g., 8 infantry and 3 artillery, the tech would only give you +3 pips of punch – it’s just not very exciting. You could try attacking with a stack of all artillery, e.g., 10 artillery for $40, but that just seems weird and un-thematic.

Anyway, let me know if you try out the rules, with or without some modifications! I’d be curious to see how they work in live play. I’m defending my rules so you have the benefit of my opinions, but they’re just opinions, and ultimately the house rules are there for everyone to enjoy however they like…if you think you’ll have more fun tweaking the costs or nerfing a couple of the techs, then go with what seems fun! :-)

The map is still a mess. MS Paint’s paintbrush option doesn’t appear to lay an even coat, so I can’t auto-fill within national borders, meaning that each country must be painted by hand. I’m trying to figure out if it would be wise to invest in a WaCom tablet for this kind of work and would greatly appreciate any suggestions from some of the community’s seasoned mapmakers.

I’ve calculated income (IPC values) for all the major and minor powers in the game at this point, so let’s shift gears tonight and take a look at how that breaks down, with some additional points of interest for each country. Here’s an early (albeit incomplete) preview.

Allied Powers

United Kingdom & Dominions: 54

Representing His Majesty’s possessions and Commonwealth allies west of Suez. The U.K. starts with sevenof the Empire’s eight battleships in the Atlantic and Mediterranean, and one of its two battlecruisers. The British also field a pair of fleet carriers, divided between either station.

British Far East Command: 50

All British Empire forces east of Suez, inclusive of Australia and New Zealand. There are 10 INF in greater India alone, and another 4 in Malaya or on Singapore at game start. By contrast, Australia and New Zealand are virtually defenseless. A battleship, battlecruiser, cruiser, and two destroyers comprise the Royal Navy presence here.

France: 37

France is a going concern in this game, with powerful armies concentrated along the Maginot Line, the Alpine Line on the Franco-Italian border, and in North Africa. The French Indochina garrison is also formidable, with 1 INF, 1 ARTY, and 1 FTR. Powerful squadrons of the French Navy, including 2 BB and 1 BC, are at Toulon and Mers el-Kébir. A cruiser lays at anchor off Indochina. A troop transport in the Indian Ocean carries 1 additional INF and 1 AAA.

United States of America: 130

The wealthiest nation on Earth, but humbled by the Depression. The United States Navy counts ten battleships and one fleet carrier.

Pro-Allied Minors

United Netherlands: 28

Anticipating war with Japan rather than Germany, the Dutch spent heavily on air and naval defenses in the Indies, where a BC and a SUB patrol, backed by a TAC. At game start, a Dutch FTR on Java is the closest possible air cover available for Malaya. A modest increase to the army began more recently, but there can be no illusions about what will happen if Europe falls into another war.

Communist Powers

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: 57

An industrial behemoth, the Soviets are arrayed against the Germans in the west and the Japanese in the Far East. The massive Red Army fields 24 infantry in total.

Axis Powers

Japan: 35

In terms of capital ships, the Japanese operate three BB and one BC, as well as two fleet carriers.

Italy: 22

Still smarting over the abandonment of her Entente partners in the last war, Italy has renewed its membership in the Triple Alliance. The Italian army in North Africa, amounting to 2 INF, 1 ARTY, 1 armored car (AC), and 1 ARM, is a significant threat to French possessions there. The Italian Navy includes 1 BB and 1 fleet carrier. Italy’s mobilization factor of 11 INF is high for a country of her size; by way of comparison, the British Far East Command fields 17 INF at game start, spread across a far wider operational area.

Pro-Allied Minors

Polish Commonwealth: 11

In this timeline, a client state of Germany. Considering the weight of Soviet metal arrayed on its eastern border, the Poles are likely to serve as the doormat over which its neighbors stomp with reckless abandon.

Siam 2

A client state of Japan. Poised to invade French Indochina at game start with a formidable army of 3 INF, 1 ARM, and 1 FTR. The Siamese navy is a destroyer, standing in for the pair of coast defense ships it operated historically.

I’d be willing to sign up as the noob player, I just finished reading the rules. IF there exists a way to play online with such a ruleset then I could play online. Why would you need 4 axis players though? Isn’t this game purely zero-sum anyway? So a single axis player and a single allied player should be mostly similar to having multiple players on each team.

Well, no one is bullying anyone that I have seen.

Its more over-strategizing each round, seemingly inviting discussion for each combat operation by allies.

Not discounting valuable advice from your allies which we all seek, my view is that this level of co-ordination in-turn each round takes away from individual play and is time consuming. For me, something challenging may be lost when allies overly depend on other’s impute on each strategy.

In the end, each player controls the country so at some point individual play is necessary.

IDK if even 1 IPC bonus per working Convoy SZ can remain manageable.
US 9, UK 8, Japan 7, Germany 2, URSS 1.

Well, there’s no reason we can’t decrease the number of convoy zones. The point should be to simulate a few of the most important, most vulnerable commerce lanes, not to put a convoy box in every single sea zone that saw merchant traffic. Just off the cuff, here’s another possible distribution of convoy zones for 1942.2:

USSR: Archangel, Soviet Far East
Germany: Baltic, Central Med
UK: English Channel, Central Atlantic, Eastern Med, Persian Gulf, Cape of Good Hope
Japan: Tokyo Bay, South China Sea, Java Sea, Coral Sea, Leyte Gulf
USA: Solomon Islands, Pearl Harbor, Caribbean, New York, Brazil

That should produce a less crazy income swing. If you think that’s still too much, you can relocate income from land territories to adjacent sea zones, instead of adding fresh income. E.g., Borneo drops from 4 IPCs to 3 IPCs, but the Borneo Sea Zone is now worth +1 IPCs if its convoy is undamaged.

@Imperious:

The Strategic Bomber is just fine as it is. The only OOB unit that’s problematic is the Cruiser at 10 IPC.

People buy Bombers because of their reach for both land and sea, numbers don’t quantity that value.

Sorry IL but it is a totally different paradigm we were talking about.
A game changer for Strategic bomber, no more A4 C12 M6.
It is a much different dynamic and have way more interesting implications.

Here is the link to this Redesign discussion:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39384.msg1632453#msg1632453

Soon, you will be able to playtest G40 both AA Cruiser C12 and bomber C5 on Triple A.

This method is to compare between SBR values in itself.
It cannot consider general combat values for sure.

And a way to explain why some SBR method and values may be unbalanced even without a lot of gametests.

If you can build rail centers, players get a risk/reward thing going on that develops player options. They buy something and it benefits them, the enemy can negate them and it costs them using as bomber which in turn costs the enemy the use for another purpose he did not intend.

If i did this “stop land units moving two spaces” you disrupt all currently known strategy…basically invalidate it with one sentence, then you make combat moves problematic because tanks are usually behind the front lines because they move two and they are protected behind the front lines ( in the case of the German-Russo conflict). With your idea the whole panzer army needs to be on the front line and have lost the options to move north or south two spaces, and just have to fight whats next to them. You with that rule ruined the game. thanks.

It appears you never played global 1940?

Just please stick to the actual rules and find a pretty idea that adds to what players can do in the game that was not already accounted for.

How about an idea regarding neutrals? or Tech changes to alter SBR raids ( perhaps jet fighters taken in as escorts fire at 2?)  ?  ?

Something from that mind, that generally smart mind you have…

But how would you know how many IPC Ottomans would have if you didn’t do any study on the economic capabilities of the other nations relating to 31 IPC? How would you know how many infantry they would have in each area if you didn’t study where they even had armies in 1914?

You need to just draw a map with territory borders that allows good player options and is realistic. Don’t redo 1914, that’s garbage. This is redesign, not use what you got

This is not checkers my friend.

Yes:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38717.0

@Imperious:

Ok here is the gist of it… you want a unit that can “target” another unit for removal? This is the domain of either armor units ( tank destroyers, SPA, or even heavy artillery)

Infantry would only have it in terms of a commando or special forces unit that goes in and takes out an installation or special tech unit. Use my rule for SPA or allow a unit like a commando unit to choose what it hits if it rolls a one.

Forgot to mention this will be in my D12 games so the hit on a 1 will work.
Elite Guard Inf, SS Inf, Bravo Inf or Black Shirt Inf, Veteran Inf, Commando, and a Marine, A3FR A2 D4 M1 C4 A roll of a 1 can pick target first round only. Can build 1 per turn only.

I think 2 a turn may be to strong. I can put a token under a inf piece or stack showing how many get the special shot if you can build 2 a turn but only 1 gets the special shot.

Both Hospitals and Ships are off limits to enemy fire. They can move in either the combat or non combat movement phase but not in both. You could move your hospital out of an enemy occupied territory and keep moving once per turn until you have it where you want it. They never are lost. For example, when China has lost it’s last man simply move the hospital down to India or the Middle East where your Ally can use it.

Those particular 12 sided dice work perfectly because of the symbol on them to mark a 12. It looks like a red cross symbol. You can get a set of them here;
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Amerika-Custom-Dice-D12-x6_p_2142.html

The reason I started the game with hospitals already is because they would have had these heading into a war, not waiting until someone got shot to think of buying some bandages. Also, I didn’t want to take any money away from the game that could be spent on weapons. I thought that most players wouldn’t bother buying them because either they couldn’t afford it ( like China) or they would just rather buy tanks so it would be a waste of time to make the rule and buy the pieces.

Well, it could add some interesting flavor to the endgame, but if you’re down to two territories, then you’re not purchasing much of anything anyway, so there won’t be much tactical difference.

One of the strongest two-territory combinations is Moscow + Caucasus, which are often worth about 12 IPCs. So, instead of 4 regular infantry, you buy 6 citizen-soldiers…but they’ll defend roughly as well. 6 hit points and 6 defensive pips vs. 4 hit points and 8 defensive pips? It’s kind of a wash.

Even if you get the design of the citizen-soldier unit right, having the rule kick in when you’re down to only a couple of territories doesn’t quite satisfy the itch I’ve got, which is to punish countries that repeatedly over-produce infantry. The idea is that if you pour out the blood of your armies like water, well, then, eventually you run out of blood! But with the two-territory rule, you could build nothing but tanks and fighters the whole game, symbolizing your anxious concern to avoid risking any more lives than you absolutely have to – and then still wind up “running out” of infantry in the endgame when your enemies push you back to your capital.

There’s nothing wrong with designing custom units, and in fact I think your citizen-soldier unit is quite well-balanced, but I don’t think the “manpower tracking” problem can be solved with any kind or kinds of custom units. It’s just not that sort of problem.

I’m curious if anyone has played only rolling for mines when resolving an amphibious invasion and ignoring them otherwise. My idea is that mines are ignored for movement (unless Allied ships attempt to move through SZ 11 to SZ 10 or 12 while Germany controls Berlin or Allied ships attempt to move through SZ 20 to SZ 17 or 19 or 21 while the Ottomans control Constantinople) and naval battles on the high seas. Mines are rolled for when a player attempts an amphibious invasion in a mined SZ. If a naval battle has to occur before the amphibious landing, then mines are rolled before the naval battle.

Haven’t tried this yet, but I thought it would encourage slightly more naval action, but was curious to get other’s thoughts. Would this unleash the High Seas Fleet or encourage a greater degree of turtling than that already encouraged by the current rules?

(My apologies if this has already been discussed, I haven’t done an exhaustive search of the forums).