If I were Larry, I would…

[lozmoid]

@Gargantua:

…take back the copyright of Axis and Allies from WoTC, and give it over to a fan based organization, before it’s too late.

Or anyone else for that matter.

[WILD BILL]

Cool topic. If I were Larry……

I would take away the silly African safari and island hopping thing, making the Commi expansion NO only continental Europe and Mid East. Reduce it to 2 IPCs, but include pro allied neutrals too. I would make a lend lease NO for Russia through the Mid East as well. This would give both sides a reason to fight for the Mid East (axis get oil NO).

3 IPCs for no axis war ships in sz80, and allied control of Persia, NW Per, & Caucasus (no allies on orig red tt).
3 IPCs for the currant LL NO w/sz125 & Arc (no allies on orig red tt).

I would do convoys at the beginning of the victims turn, then deducted in collect income. Still use dice, but at the units combat attack values w/subs getting two dice at 2’s (German subs roll 2 dice at 3’s). Each hit causes one damage to convoy (instead of adding up all dice).

I would look at SBR (could use a tweak), but would realize that raising dice of intercepting & escorting ftrs to 2’s would probably promote even less SBR. I would know that it seems more realistic (felt that way too) w/ftrs on both sides firing at 2, and bmrs/tacs at 1, but it could also cause more air units to get shot down in the dog fight. More risk, less SBR?  Right now the defender can get overwhelmed, so wouldn’t send up interceptors. If he gets a higher roll w/def ftrs at 2, as the attacker you would probably have to commit more ftrs to keep him grounded.

W/SBR I would consider raising the damage a minor IC & bases could take.

A major IC cost 30 IPCs, and can take 20 damage (2/3’s of it cost). Minors & bases should be the same.

Major IC cost 30 IPC takes 20 damage (2/3 cost) 20/30 = 66.6%
Minor IC cost 12 IPC takes 8 damage (2/3 cost) 8/12 = 66.6%
Bases cost 15 IPC take 10 damage (2/3 cost) 10/15 = 66.6%

I would also consider lowering the cost of bases to 12 IPCs (like minor IC), because of the bases removed w/Alpha’s (would help both sides and promote more base building).

Then it would be:
Bases cost 12 IPC take 8 damage (2/3 cost) 8/12 = 66.6%

I would also cap repairs for a naval base to a max of 3 ships (like scramble for an air base), and have damage of a base reduce its scramble/repairs ability just like damage lowers production of a minor IC.

For minor IC and bases:
1 damage to facility = 2 units produced/scrambled/repaired
2 damage to facility = 1 unit produced/scrambled/repaired
3 damage to facility = 0 units produced/scrambled/repaired (bases give no movement bonus)

[oztea]

Capping the repairs a port can make per turn would be HUGE in the pacific in my play group.

We get to a point around the Caroline Islands when someone parks a huge fleet there and controls the port, and they can’t move onward because the enemy fleet is so big it will catch them and crush them, so it has to stay under the net of an AB and have a port to flip back over it’s 10 capital ships.

If a point of damage was added to a port each time it makes a repair, id say that would be fair.

[Guest]

Hmm so it would basically cost you $1 to repair a battleship, or the naval base that repaired the battleship.

[Gargantua]

That’s the best -repair- concept I ever heard Oztea.

Would work well with a house rule I just proposed…

[Cow]

I see lots of SBR on russia… but not on anyone else (germany has 2 majors and a minor in france so it is kinda pointless). the +2 damage is what wrecks russia, just make it 1d6.

[Guest]

Add a french tranny to zone 105.

Now Germany would have the choice of either focus on France and royal navy and watch normandy be evacuated, or kill the tranny or attack normandy spreading his force.

This is a actual choise Hitler had during the invation of France, so it be good from a historical point of view as well.
It might make France somehow more exiting to play.

[soulfein]

@ErwinRommel:

Add a french tranny to zone 105.

that s a really nice idea
:)

[wheatbeer]

@Cow:

I see lots of SBR on russia… but not on anyone else (germany has 2 majors and a minor in france so it is kinda pointless). the +2 damage is what wrecks russia, just make it 1d6.

I would rather go back to only escorts/interceptors firing during dogfights with interceptors hitting at 2.

I thought SBR was perfectly balanced when those were the rules.  Though I agree it’s too easy to toast Moscow (under current rules).

[Ghost One]

If I were Larry I would
-take tigerman77’s 1939 board and turn it into a real axis and allies game
-give Russia a fighting chance against Germany if D-day never comes
-force WOTC to make a specific sculpt for each unit for each country
-do more with pro-neutrals and strict neutrals
-put optional advantages back in the game
-make R and D not a luck of the roll (because really, who has the money other than America to gamble away each turn at the chance of always getting nothing)
-make a book of balanced and polished house rules and variants
-get WOTC a hearing aid so they can listen to the fans

[Noll]

If I were Larry I would add more seazones in the medi, making it possible to have the medi contested instead of being always one-sided.

[Yavid]

rewrite the tech system
rewrite the convey system
add Vichy rules
make an Axis and Allies game not centered on the Americans (Stalingrad, Kursk, North Africa)
make french and italian units
look at the idea of using the same system in different wars (american civil war, ww1, Korea)

[Ghost One]

i really like that last idea, he really should look at other wars he could make into awesome games

[Yavid]

most of the other wars would be a map, a set up, and rules for cavalry, maybe a tech chart, and change the basic inf. into a 1/1/1/3 unit. And maybe one or two rules special for that war.

As understand the reason for the 2 defense and 1 attack is entrenching defensive positions, fox holes trenches stuff like that. American Civil War the soldiers didn’t dig in for the night.

[Spendo02]

@Yavid:

most of the other wars would be a map, a set up, and rules for cavalry, maybe a tech chart, and change the basic inf. into a 1/1/1/3 unit. And maybe one or two rules special for that war.

As understand the reason for the 2 defense and 1 attack is entrenching defensive positions, fox holes trenches stuff like that. American Civil War the soldiers didn’t dig in for the night.

They utilized terrain to their advantage though - Little Round Top comes to mind.  Fields, Tree/Fence lines, etc.  I’m pretty sure the defender was better off than the attacker as the majority of times the attacker had to advance into an open area and face artillery/cavalry before they even get in range to fire at the defensive lines.

[Yavid]

i’m speaking from what i’ve read in one of the A&A rule books. I think it was MB’s Classic.

[oztea]

Sitting still usually gives the defender a huge advantage.
He knows the enemy is coming, and doesn’t need to move his supplies very far once they get to the battlezone.

Traditionally commanders want to attack with 3:1 odds, for a decent chance at victory….probably because a defending soldier is twice as effective as one attacking.

Just saw something on TV about Pickett’s charge, and the South only had a 2:1 manpower advantage.
A VERY risky attack by anyone’s standards.

Even in A&A the axiom holds true.
Making a 3:1 attack should succeed, a 2:1 attack is daring, and a 1:1 attack is suicide.

[Cow]

???

I would bet on 5 inf beating 3 anyday.

[Gargantua]

Oztea…

When the balance of economics ISN’t behind you, it’s better to face the 1v1 suicide. :)

[Cow]

anyway, I just hope developers play the game before they bust it out. OOB was a little ridiculous, but I am glad we got past it.