I think most people agree that this rule is unrealistic, and also that the defender should be allowed to retreat.

However, AxA’s combat system relys on just a few basic dynamics for the attacker vs the defender.  Both attacker and defender want to stack up and stick together.

Separate teams have the disadvantage of not being able to attack together, but they do get to attack in sequence (can-opening) and defend together.  Small groups of units get slaughtered by maneuver units.  And wherever you do build up in force, the defense is all or nothing (no retreats, limited opty’s to invite in more defending units eg scrambing).

Because of these dynamics, you don’t necessarily need to put units in areas that aren’t threatened at that moment.  You are encouraged to concentrate your forces and strike in coordinated ways, which simulates combined arms and grand maneuver.

Blockers add a kind of certainty to how this will play out.  1 unit alone cannot win most battles.  However, it can “win” the defense by blocking a much larger ## of offending units.  This is essentially another defender’s advantage;  he cannot absolutely determine whether he will be attacked but he can place his units in a way that limits what offensive units can come.

So, to apply that to the Hawaii dance, if the US sits on Hawaii and enjoys its airbase protection and proximity to San Fran, then they can easily be screened out by 1 DD.  Likewise, they can screen an attack by Japan out with 1 DD.  If the USA wants to move into an “unblockable” position (within 2 SZ not 3 SZ) from SZ 6, he has to take a much bigger defensive risk also.  The various map areas that are fought over all have this dynamic–if you want to be able to attack from multiple directions or for certain, you must put units closer to the frontlines, which puts them at risk.

This is the ‘chess’ that ABH refers to, IMO.  The game has a very sublime risk/reward analysis and while setting up all your microbattles and garrisons and deciding how to spend your $$ are fun, they aren’t really the bread and butter of the game.  The bread and butter are those giant “moving parts” strategic attacks/defenses where you are bringing in stuff from all over the board, and having to plan 1-2 turns in advance on both offense and defense in order to bring the right stuff together at the right time (and also finding a place to land afterwards :)

So, I feel like the game sacrifices some realism for a really fun chessy dynamic.  It also sacrifices complexity by not looking at things like supply lines, unit quality (all units of the same type are the same), or team based advantages (all teams have the same buy menu), or command/control (that’s you).

A game about nuclear war could be realistic but it wouldn’t be any fun (build up for 6 hours then nuke it all away).  A game about the Cold War could be realistic but not fun (“I bang my shoe on the podium, again”)

That’s why they keep making games about WW2–it was a war of maneuver on a grand scale that probably wont ever be repeated in its scope, that has dynamics that can be represented pretty effectively in a game.

@Imperious:

But the total tokens should be equal in quantity between axis and allies.

Why? The Axis already have the balance advantage.

I played another game with India at 5, but I played against myself instead of the AI (first time doing that!).

Russia got absolutely diced in the heavy Ukraine strafe, and so West Russia was abandoned R2 and with no fighter support (Iceland gone G1, no other good routes) Germany rolled over them on turn G5.

Once the fighter route was gone I went heavy tanks in India, hoping to swing out against the Japanese and provide defence for Moscow.  I did have 8 UK tanks about to rush in to Moscow for defence (on UK6), but that would have exposed India on J6 AND Japanese tanks were closing in on Moscow as well, so it would have been a 1 or 2 turn delay at most.  Japan had the luxury of building a factory in Manchuria for north route tanks and just stacking Yunnan with art and inf (with their fleet in the adjacent SZ) and deadzone Burma, so the UK troop buildup in India couldn’t really pivot out of India as much as I thought.  Any foray out of India, and the 5 IPC factory would be gone, so the two armies stayed in the gravitational pull of one another.

I’ve never really done a KJF, but I think that might work a lot better with 5 IPC India.  I might read some KJF strategies and try it out.  So far, 5 IPC India is a failure, haha.

Well I’m still not sure how simple it is to implement a group phase like the warchest concept I mentioned.

Might be advisable to keep regular war bonds in the back pocket. And the +5 for capturing an enemy VC as outlined in the master thread would be good to have as a toggle. Since at least we know both of those mechanics work in tripleA.

But yeah I think the warchest VC concept has promise, if it can work in 1942.2, I’m pretty sure it will work even better in Global.

I like all the special sea zone restrictions. Gibraltar and Danish straights. Any thoughts on Suez going through Egypt.

Also like the inclusion of aaafire and some limited transportation capability. Anything that makes for more attractive ship builds always seems good to me.
:-D

On the air, the main impediment to ready testing FtF is the requirement to buy more stuff than comes in the boxed game. With a G40 expansion you still only have 3 sculpts.

I was thinking about this issue for the C5 strategic bomber concept in 1942.2.

One thought I had about Tacs in 1942.2 for the Defenseless Strat B idea I had, was that some aircraft might be represented on the map by a scult that always has a green chip under it (saving all green chips for this use). So with that idea, I was thinking you could represent 3 air units with only 2 sculpts. For example

Strat B = C5 SBR only
Green Chip Fighter = Tactical Bomber
Fighter (red or gray chip) = Fighter

Or you could use a roundel, or paint a tail, but the green chip seemed pretty easy to work with.
Fighter can still fit on a deck that way.

Perhaps if its a game designed to use G40 sculpts for 1942.2 you could just do the same thing with the bomber sculpts? Like
Medium bomber = normal sculpt
Strat bomber = green chip sculpt.

Just an idea to make it easy to test, without a big commitment in painting or purchasing new stuff.

For the factories, I do worry that it takes any series threat to Tokyo from the Americans pretty much off the table. It’s very hard to get onto the mainland in an effective way with US, without expanding production on the money islands. Is this what you are trying to avoid? Or are you trying to prevent Japan from using one on India/Africa/Australia?

For my part I enjoy the factory unit, so rules that restrict where it can go aren’t as appealing to me. Basically the 3 islands affected, Philippines, East Indies and especially Borneo, are pretty much the only interesting territories in whole the Pacific, by virtue of their production potential, so it seems a shame to lose them.

The Nazi practice of infiltration of the politics of a neutral they want on their side. They finance, provide support and weapons to overthrow and supplant the existing government.

Yugoslavia
Hungary
Romania
Bulgaria
etc.

@Argothair:

My question is more about what do you do when you only have enough sculpts or enough attention span to play with one type of fighter. Is there a way to keep island bases vs. carrier bases balanced with only one type of fighter?

Or to put it another way: introducing a special extra unit simply for the sake of creating more unit variety is one thing, but introducing a special unit in order to fix a perceived problem with the game map or with the game rules is something else.  It’s not necessarily a bad idea, but perhaps an adjustment to the rules would be a more direct approach.

Also, it looks like you’ve made submarines 1 IPC cheaper and given them a convoy raiding ability, without any real compensating disadvantages. You’ve changed the submerge ability, but on balance I think the submerge ability is still equally powerful. I think submarines are already a pretty good buy OOB at 6 IPCs, in part because they are the cheapest ship and therefore often the best available fodder.

One thing to know about Subs A2first strike A1 C5 is that loosing them on defense as fodder, is a pretty good news to the attacker. Because, if they submerge, they will gets a much better attack factor than DDs, and for 5 IPCs, pretty cheap to buy. Also, you cannot use them as fodder against other sub.
So, on offence, it is better to lose DDs because A2 first strike should be preserved.
On defense, it is better to use your Sub later, hence Submerging eventually.
And Subs cannot hit subs so you must pick DD as fodder instead.

I had to rewrite it.  Oh well, I made it more brief.

@CWO:

Should I give this some thought to see if I can come up with something that would work along those lines?

I would be interested in it  - if the answer is simple enough…overcomplication kills most house rules for me…

It is always good to start by playing triple A, USA8, as a way of learning the basics. That is how many of us started out.

Of course you can now play other members of the forum using triple A. If you ever want to do that and need any pointers at what to do then just ask.

It may be hard to find an opponent who wants to play 1941 however.

GRASSHOPPER’S INVITATIONAL - HOUSE RULE SET

YouTube video explanation:

coming soon

Card deck accessory PDF files available for print:

coming soon

Victory Objectives & Victory Tokens

Once a victory objective is achieved, a victory token will be awarded, the side with the most victory tokens at the end of the day wins the game. Victory tokens are awarded immediately upon completion regardless of when, or how the objective was achieved. Also, a token can never be taken away once earned, and they may never be awarded twice for the same objective. It doesn’t matter which round the game ends, however, a win or a tie can only be declared at the end of a full game round.

Tournament Rule: On top of any victory tokens earned during each game, teams that win their game outright will receive a free victory token, and teams that finish a game without allowing a victory token will receive a free victory token.
New Research & Development Rule:

Research rolls are no longer used to develop breakthroughs, instead, nations are awarded development rolls when victory objectives have been achieved. Once a victory token is gained, the nation with the corresponding (*) instructions listed with each objective will choose a breakthrough chart, and make a free development roll with the resulting breakthrough taking effect immediately (may not effect units already in battle during the turn in which the breakthrough was rolled). Any breakthroughs gained by the UK regardless of which side of the map a token was achieved will effect all UK purchases and all UK units on the board.

Here is a list of all victory objectives for each side…

Axis Powers

London -The Axis control London
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Moscow -The Axis control Moscow
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Calcutta
-The Axis control Calcutta
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Sydney
-The Axis control Sydney
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Africa
-The Axis control Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Tobruk, Alexandria, and Egypt.
(R&D) *The nation that controls the most
Pacific -The Axis control 6 victory cities on the Pacific map
(R&D) *The nation that controls the most Europe
-The Axis control 7 victory cities on the Europe map
(R&D) *The nation that controls the most

Economy
-All 3 Axis powers have a combined total of 136 IPCs on the income tracker
(R&D) *The nation that is earning the most
Allied Powers

Berlin
-The Allies control Berlin
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Rome
-The Allies control Rome
(R&D) *The nation that takes control

Tokyo
-The Allies control Tokyo
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Africa -The Allied powers control all non-neutral territories on the continent of Africa
(R&D) *The nation that controls the most
Paris
-The Allies have liberated Paris
(R&D) *The nation that takes control
Philippines
-The Allies have liberated the Philippines
(R&D) *The United States

Asia
-The Allies control the Burma road as well as Hong Kong and Shanghai
(R&D) *The United Kingdom

Pacific
-There are no Japanese Capital ships on the board
(R&D) *The United States

New & Modified Breakthrough Charts

Modifications to oob breakthroughs are in red italics, Paratroopers have been replaced with Super Carrier Decks, and breakthroughs among the 2 charts have been re-positioned for balance.

Breakthrough Chart #1

Heavy Artillery
All artillery now support up to 2 attacking infantry and/or mech infantry each

Rockets
Each operational airbase may launch a rocket at an enemy facility up to 4 spaces away, roll 2 dice per rocket and apply the highest result for damage.

Jet Fighters
All fighters now attack at 4 or less, and defend at 2 or less when escorting or intercepting.

Long-Range Aircraft
Maximum movement range for all air units is now increased by 1.

War Bonds
During the collect income phase, roll 2 dice and collect IPCs in the amount shown on the highest roll. (For UK war bonds, Calcutta will gain IPCs from the lowest roll, London will gain IPCs from the highest roll).

Blitz Tactics
Mech infantry now attack at 2 or less if paired with a tank as well as artillery, they may blitz without tanks, and they may tow 1 artillery unit each during the non-combat movement phase.
Breakthrough Chart #2

Super Submarines
All submarines now attack at 3 or less.

Anti-Aircraft Radar
All ainti-aircraft fire from AA artillery, or AA guns built into facilities now defend at 2 or less.

Improved Shipyards
Battleships, Aircraft Carriers, and Cruisers are now 3 IPCs cheaper, and Destroyers, Submarines, and transports are now 1 IPC cheaper.

Mass Production
The mobilization capacity of all production facilities has been increased by 2. Also, you may remove 2 damage markers for the price of 1.

Super Carrier Decks
All aircraft carriers may now carry up to 3 fighters and/or tactical bombers each.

Heavy Bombers
When attacking during a battle or a SBR, roll 2 dice for each strategic bomber and select the best result.

New & Modified National Objectives

Germany (in addition to all original NOs)
-5 IPCs if an Axis power controls London

Soviet Union (2 NOs which replaces the original National Prestige NO)
-5 IPCs if there are no Axis warships in sea zone #125, and the Allies control Archangel as well as London
-5 IPCs if there are no Allied units on any original Russian territories

Japan (in addition to all original NOs)
-5 IPCs if Japan controls all original Chinese territories

United States (in addition to all original NOs)
-5 IPCs if the United States are at war with the Axis powers

UK Europe (in addition to all original NOs)

New Strategic Bombing Rules

The +2 damage bonus for each strategic bomber during strategic bombing raids will now be distributed like such…

+1 Damage - if the strategic bombers rolling for damage have departed from an operational airbase.
+1 Damage - if the strategic bombers rolling for damage did not encounter an enemy interceptor.

Player Assignments:

6 Player Games
Player 1. Germany
Player 2. Italy
Player 3. Japan
Player 4. Soviet Union / China
Player 5. United States / ANZAC
Player 6. United Kingdom / France

TIME BLOCKS & TIME TOKENS

GERMANY TIME BLOCK = 10 MIN - 5 TOKENS
SOVIET UNION TIME BLOCK = 5 MIN - 5 TOKENS
JAPAN TIME BLOCK = 10 MIN - 5 TOKENS
UNITED STATES TIME BLOCK = 5 MIN - 5 TOKENS
CHINA = 5 MIN - 2 TOKENS
UNITED KINGDOM = 10 MIN - 5 TOKENS
ITALY = 5 MIN - 5 TOKENS
ANZAC = 5 MIN - 2 TOKENS
FRANCE = 5 MIN - 2 TOKENS

Thanks for the thoughts, Flashman.

While your definition of strict neutrality is more historically accurate, it seems to me that it doesn’t really change anything. The Italians and the Ottomans would have a “normal” game, just starting one turn later.

My thought was to use an existing game mechanic (US-style neutrality) for Italy and the Ottoman Empire as a way to slightly bolster two vulnerable powers. Allowing Italy a turn to purchase and move units unmolested by other powers is the point. Similarly, preventing Russia from invading the Ottoman Empire before OE1 is the point.

Of course, everyone will know what’s coming (it’s a game after all), so they can take steps to counter likely opening moves, but it will give Italy and the Ottomans just a tiny bit of breathing room (hopefully).

And I do realize that US-style neutrality does mean that Ottoman units can’t be brought onto the board to defend Persia (or any other neutral/minor power) if it is invaded before OE1. But I don’t think having German or Austro-Hungarian units put onto the board to be killed the same turn is really going to change the dynamic much (unless the British player has no luck with the dice).

Some very excellent ideas here, thanks General for pointing me to this section!

Thank you  :-)

Yes it kind of helped steer me this direction - thanks SS!

@SS:

Ya I agree
Didn’t mean there was a cap neither just throwing up some numbers

So how much you need to repair before you can use it ? 4 - 6 ? Down to 3 ?

If increasing to 8 or 10, I rather keep 3 to make unoperational.
Thinking about the OOB rules, probably make it 3 and more to be unoperational was due to get Bases fix with only 4 IPCs or less, Minor IC cost 4 or less to be able to produce 1 unit at least.
Both have similar requirements.

This mechanics can also be applied to ABs as Carolina is suggesting:

Air and Naval base damage
@Carolina:

Great topic - hi-lights how A&A is a little too basic.  ie. not all hits should be equal - really, when would AAA blow every plane out of the sky?

I would propose to change the AAA rule for bases and industry that AAA does not kill but affects the accuracy of the attacker.  Defending installation rules a 1d6 and this is subtracted from the attacker’s roll.  
1d6-1 for fighters and tacB
1d6-2 for bombers
Roll an AAA dice for each attacking aircraft.

@Baron:

1942.2 SBR Black Elk hypothesis

Strategic Bomber
Attack 0
Damage 1D6, 1D6+2
Cost 5

Fighter
Attack 1
Defense 1
Cost 10

Break even point C5, 1D6 damage: near 1 StB vs 2 Fgs: 0.5 StB/Fg
1 StB vs 2 Fgs : + 2.025 - 2.106 = -0.081 IPCs
12 StB vs 23 Fgs: exactly 0.522 StB/Fg
No FIT (Fighter Interception Threshold), always beneficial to Intercept.

Down below here is a different values doing SBR for 1942.2 and G40

Strategic Bomber in air-to-air combat SBR:
Attack 0
Bombard IC damage: D6 or 1D6+2

Fighter in air-to-air combat SBR:
Attack 1
Defend 1

IC’s AAA: @1 against each Strategic Bomber

1942.2 SBR HRules with StB A0 and Fg A1 D1 : damage 1D6 or 1D6+2

1 Strategic Bomber doing SBR against no interceptor

AAA roll = odds casualties

5/6 StB survived * 5.5 IPCs = +4.583 IPCs *3.5= +2.917 *6.5= 5.417
1/6 StB killed *5 IPCs = -0.833 IPCs

D6: +2.917-0.833= +2.084 IPCs
D6+2: + 4.583 - 0.833 = +3.750 IPCs damage/SBR

1 Strategic Bomber Att 0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor Def 1

Interceptor Fg roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

1/66/6 = 6/36 1 StB killed by Fg
5/61/6 = 5/36 1 StB killed by AAA
5/6*5/6 = 25/36 No casualty at all.

Results:
Bombard on IC 25/36* ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 3.819 IPCs *3.5= 2.431 *6.5=+4.514
StB killed 11/36 *-5 IPCs = - 1.528 IPCs

D6: + 2.431 - 1.528 = +0.903
D6+2: + 3.819 - 1.528= + 2.291 IPC damage/SBR

1 Strategic Bomber Att 0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors Def 1

Interceptors Fgs roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

11/366/6 = 66/216 1 StB killed by Fg
25/361/6 = 25/216 1 StB killed by AAA
25/36*5/6 = 125/216 No casualty at all.

Results:
Bombard on IC 125/216* ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 3.183 IPCs *3.5= 2.025 *6.5=+3.762
StB killed 91/216 *- 5 IPCs = - 2.106 IPCs

D6: + 2.025 - 2.106 = -0.081 IPCs
D6+2: + 3.183 - 2.106 = +1.077 IPC damage/SBR

1 Fighter Att 1 and 1 Strategic Bomber Att 0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors Def 1

Fighter roll/interceptors Fgs roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

1/61/366/6 = 6/1296 1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fgs vs 1 Fg
1/610/361/6= 10/1296 1 Fg killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
1/610/365/6= 50/1296 1 Fg killed by Fg vs 1 Fg
1/625/361/6 = 25/1296 1 StB killed by AAA
1/625/365/6 = 125/1296 No casualty vs 1 Fg

5/620/366/6 = 600/1296 1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fg vs no casualty
5/616/361/6 = 80/1296 1 Fg killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
5/616/365/6 = 400/1296 no casualty at all

Results:
Bombard on IC: 1050/1296 * ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 4.456 IPCs 3.5= +2.836 6.5=+5.266
Killing 1 Fg: 216/1296 +10 IPCs = + 1.667 IPCs
Fg killed: 300/1296-10 IPCs = - 2.315 IPCs
StB killed: 150/1296 -5 IPCs = - 0.579IPCs
StB & Fg killed: 96/1296 -15 IPCs = - 1.111 IPCs

D6: +4.503 - 1.690 = +2.813 IPCs
D6+2: + 6.123 - 1.690 = + 4.433 IPC damage/SBR

1 Fighter Att 1 and 1 Strategic Bomber Att 0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor Def 1
Fighter escort taking the casualty.
Fighter roll/interceptor Fg roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

1/61/61/6= 1/216 1 Fg killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
1/61/65/6= 5/216 1 Fg killed by Fg vs 1 Fg
1/65/61/6 = 5/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
1/65/65/6 = 25/216 No casualty vs 1 Fg

5/61/61/6 = 5/216 1 Fg killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
5/61/65/6 = 25/216 1 Fg killed by Fg vs no casualty
5/65/61/6 = 25/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
5/65/65/6 = 125/216 no casualty at all

Results:
Bombard on IC: 180/216 * ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 4.583 IPCs 3.5= +0.833 6.5=+5.417
Killing 1 Fg: 36/216 +10 IPCs = + 1.667 IPCs
Fg killed:30/216-10 IPCs = - 1.389 IPCs
StB killed: 30/216 -5 IPCs = - 0.694 IPCs
StB & Fg killed: 6/216 -15 IPCs = - 0.417 IPC

D6: +2.500 - 1.111 = +1.389 IPCs
D6+2: + 6.250 - 1.111 = + 5.139 IPC damage/SBR

2 Strategic Bombers Att 0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors Def 1

Interceptor Fgs roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

1/3636/36= 36/1296 2 StBs killed by Fgs
10/366/36 = 60/1296 1 StB killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA
10/6*30/36= 300/1296 1 StB killed by Fg

25/361/36 = 25/1296 2 StBs killed by AAA
25/3610/36 = 250/1296 1 StB killed by AAA
25/36*25/36 = 625/1296 No casualty at all.

Results:
2x Bombard on IC 625/1296* ((2+4)+(12+4) IPCs)/2= +11 IPCs) = +5.305 IPCs *7=+3.378 13=+6.269
1x Bombard on IC 550/1296 ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 2.334 IPCs 3.5=+1.485 6.5=+2.758
2 StBs killed 121/1296 -10 IPCs = - 0.934 IPCs
1 StB killed 550/1296 -5 IPCs = - 2.122 IPCs

D6: +4.863 - 3.056 = +1.807 IPCs
D6+2: + 7.639 - 3.056 = + 4.583 IPCs damage/SBR

2 Strategic Bombers Att 0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor Def 1

Interceptor Fg roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

1/66/36 = 6/216 1 StB killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA
1/630/36= 30/216 1 StB killed by Fg
5/61/36 = 5/216 2 StBs killed by AAA
5/610/36 = 50/216 1 StB killed by AAA
5/6*25/36 = 125/216 No casualty at all.

Results:
2x Bombard on IC 125/216* ((2+4)+(12+4) IPCs)/2= +11 IPCs) = +6.366 IPCs *7=+4.051 13=+7.523
1x Bombard on IC 80/216 ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 2.037 IPCs 3.5=+1.296 6.5=+2.407
2 StBs killed 11/216 -10 IPCs = - 0.509 IPC
1 StB killed 80/216 -5 IPCs = - 1.852 IPCs

D6: + 5.347 - 2.361= + 2.986 IPCs
D6+2: + 8.403 - 2.361 = + 6.042 IPCs damage/SBR

Yes the Negotiations Chart and Research chart are both included in the 7.0 production chart here about halfway down the page:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34496.30