EDIT:
I wanted to slim down my proposed changes for Anniversary so that it is clearer and more structured. For this, I deleted most of the proposed special rules so that the focus lies more on the new National Objectives and Setup changes.
OLD TEXT (ALSO SLIGHTLY EDITED NOW):
Hey guys, with the advent of a reprint of Anniversary, I’d like to share a compilation of new National Objectives and setup changes that aim at remedy the following things:
National Objectives have also been a big source of controversy. Although many people liked their introduction, almost all said that they were pretty unbalanced on the old Larry Harris forum. To make them more balanced, I introduced many changes to them…
The National Objectives incite a real Pacific War. Many Islands have to be captured now by the US and Japan to fullfill their NOs. It is also the case that the US starts with most of their NOs whereas Japan has to do a lot of conquering to fulfill them. This creates a situation in which Japan actually has to go on the offensive in the Eastern Pacific, else, the US will generate a ton of money by just staying passive. I figured this would represent the actual war situation better in which the US just outproduced Japan and Japan itself has to seek a decisive victory in the Pacific (see Battle of Midway)
Almost all National Objectives for the European forces have been adjusted. Before, you had NOs that rewarded you when you were already winning (thinks of Russia’s 10 IPC NO for example OR even their NO in Global… 10 IPCs for conquering Germany? Why? They need the IPC boost BEFORE they get the job done)
I did a lot of balancing with the new National Objectives and they seems really balanced so far (for sure much more balanced than the original ones). However, if you have any concerns, please tell me and also download my Triple A game file and playtest it yourself. I am convinced you’ll be pleasantly surprised. :)
I also incorporated some typical bids. Although their combined value is higher than that of a typical Anniversary 1941 bid, keep in mind that many units are out of position (like the Artillery for Russia in the East) or only have a defensive purpose (like the extra Chinese units or the AA Gun in Egypt).
You can also download this Scenario and play it on TripleA! the following link should enable you to download the file. If there are any problems, just reach out to me.
here is a screenshot of how the new objectives appear in-game:
I just adjusted and slimed down my proposed scenario. I have played a ton of games to check for balance (via PC, myself and partially other players) and it really seems well balanced. There is a link to an altered WordWar2v3 file for TripleA if you are keen on testing this scenario.
I hope you enjoy as much as I do :)
Hey guys, since I am constantly messing with my National Objectives, testing them, trying to incorporate Feedback, I did one more adjustment which are progressive objectives:
e.g. you now get 5 IPCs for fulfilling “Lebensraum” fully, but you still get 3 IPCs for only fulfilling it partially. All other Nations but the US got these and I think this change is a lot of fun. Also some other objectives have been adjusted because they seemed to be too easy to get for certain nations.
Again, you can also download the Triple A file and copy it into “downloaded maps” and you can play it :) Just use the link at the end of this post.
And a final Screenshot that shows the changes in Triple A:
Use this link to download my map. Make sure to copy it into “downloaded maps”… where you store all your other games of Triple A.
The 1942 scenario is the preferred set up in tournament play for balance and speed (with no national objectives or tech). What if you we had more balanced NO for the 1942 scenario? The 3rd edition house rule looks promising.
I would honestly get rid of NOs. It just adds something else you have to keep track of. You should check out my “Second Edition” house rules, as they strengthen China and update the game while not trying to change too much.
You have some interesting house rules. Thank you for the suggestion.
