I like these house rules.
For technology I prefer:
-Each power will receive tech tokens, based on their current production value at the beginning of their respective turns.
-Additional tokens may not be purchased.
-Only nations at war will receive tokens.
-National Objective income does not count towards tech rolls, neither does IPCs saved.
-China’s will never receive tech tokens.
0-24IPCs = 0 Rolls
25-49IPCs = 1 Roll
50-99IPCs = 2 Rolls
100+IPCs = 3 Rolls
Each turn each nation rolls for each token in all categories it has a token in. A 6 is a breakthrough, a 1 is a token lost. If a breakthrough is achieved roll to see what technology you receive. Once you get a breakthrough within a category, all other tokens within that category are removed. Other categories are not effected by success/failure in another categories. Unsuccessful tokens not lost, remain until that powers next turn.
Tech categories:
Army Doctrine
(1-2)Paratroopers:
(3-4)Adv Artillery:
(5-6)Improved Mech:
Naval & Aviation Technology
(1-2)Super Submarines:
(3-4)Rockets:
(5-6)Radar:
Infrastructure
(1-2)Increased Factory Production:
(3-4)Improved Shipyards:
(5-6)War Bonds:
Combat Aviation
(1-2)Jet Fighters:
(3-4)Long Range Aircraft:
(5-6)Heavy Bombers:
I totally understand your method, I have adopted and created many modifications myself about technology because it’s a very blank canvas for rule inventors. However, after trying many things… I realized that the root problem was that R&D was not being used at all… period. So I stepped away from all the weapons I was trying to invent and went back to basics. Thats how the 1 free research roll came about and now we have games with research attempts leading to original technologies that don’t overpower the game.
If you’re interested in looking at one of my more elaborate research & development ideas… check out this thread I made a while ago.
http://iwngu.com/wordpress/forums/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=45
YG, your rules seem like they would Strongly favour the allies, but that’s probably OK. I really like your victory condition (12 VCs after round 5).
Just wondering why do you have the rule about bombers only getting +2 on SBR if they take off from an airbase?
YG, your rules seem like they would Strongly favour the allies, but that’s probably OK. I really like your victory condition (12 VCs after round 5).
Just wondering why do you have the rule about bombers only getting +2 on SBR if they take off from an airbase?
It looks like that if you compare it to a standard bid, however… upon closer examination of all the rules, it’s not so bad… besides, a $12 bid was never enough against the axis in our games.
I found the bomber rule in Uncrustable’s enhanced G40 thread, and it made perfect sense to us. I always felt that the +2 damage bonus was to offset the powerful defense value of interceptors before Alpha+3. When Larry reduced the value of interceptors from 2 to 1, he didn’t weaken the bombing raid. A +2 damage bonus should only be there if a bomber can load and fuel properly from an air base, it also gives air bases added value. This rule is in favor of the Allies, because it will be less devastating if Japan bombs Calcutta without purchasing an airbase.
I also like how the war bonds doesn’t really add up to much until late in the game. A few bucks each turn does add up…. eventually.
Now that you mention SBRing India from Kwangsi I can see why it would probably not be worthwhile to SBR without the airbase. There might be other instances, like USA bombing Germany from Norway or maybe either side bombing enemy ICs in Greece or Egypt. Those places often get airbases in those situations though.
Anyway, I think the best piece of this is the 12VC victory rule for either side, so the allies can actually win instead of just sandbagging until the axis run out of gas.
My tech rules are all OOB technologies, just a more even and sure fire way to get them in the game.
I do like tech tokens, but it still is better most of the time to just buy units.
I can’t remember where exactly, but I got the income for tech tokens idea from a thread of cmdr Jens and another persons
Tweaked it just a tad
Rolling a 6 is a breakthrough rolling a one however is a token lost !
Using income to determine tech rolls guarantees technology will be a part of every round of play
Going from 2 categories to 4 also helps nations get things they actually want, you still roll a dice to see what you get but it is a little less random
No more ‘USA radar’ which always is frustrating lol
I am not fond of Tech(because I am a poor loser and my opponent gets better ones), otherwise I like your House Rules.
I seriously think the US needs more At War Income, so War Bonds do it for me. Otherwise, Japan needs to lose more Air from set up. They wrongly become too powerful compared to (the obviously industrial mighty) US.
I have modified my first post to include more analysis… check it out.
I’m marking this interesting thread so I can study it when I have more time.
“Tall Paul”
@Young:
I totally understand your method, I have adopted and created many modifications myself about technology because it’s a very blank canvas for rule inventors. However, after trying many things… I realized that the root problem was that R&D was not being used at all… period. So I stepped away from all the weapons I was trying to invent and went back to basics. Thats how the 1 free research roll came about and now we have games with research attempts leading to original technologies that don’t overpower the game.
If you’re interested in looking at one of my more elaborate research & development ideas… check out this thread I made a while ago.
http://iwngu.com/wordpress/forums/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=45
Really, really, like some of these rules YG!
@Young:
I totally understand your method, I have adopted and created many modifications myself about technology because it’s a very blank canvas for rule inventors. However, after trying many things… I realized that the root problem was that R&D was not being used at all… period. So I stepped away from all the weapons I was trying to invent and went back to basics. Thats how the 1 free research roll came about and now we have games with research attempts leading to original technologies that don’t overpower the game.
If you’re interested in looking at one of my more elaborate research & development ideas… check out this thread I made a while ago.
http://iwngu.com/wordpress/forums/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=45
Really, really, like some of these rules YG!
Thanks, if you’re talking about the R&D house rules using Strategic Complexes… I admit that I used someone’s previous idea about laboratories as a template, and then all I did was inject it with steroids. Many of the developed weapon ideas however, were my own.
We have one player in our group that feels that the house rule set as a whole makes the allies to strong. However, since we have been using them, we have had 2 wins for the axis, and 2 draws. The extra brit fighter, American war bonds income, and Russian stall tactic does seem a lot more than the standard $12-14 bid system. However, there are no units interfering with the opening axis strategies, which are a great contributor to the imbalance… what do you guys think?
Nice work with the video!
I think the biggest bump to the allies is the Russian winter, especially against a fast German barbarossa because it might just be enough for the Siberians to make it in to Moscow (just like the real war!).
Nice work with the video!
I think the biggest bump to the allies is the Russian winter, especially against a fast German barbarossa because it might just be enough for the Siberians to make it in to Moscow (just like the real war!).
I have not yet played Russia in our group games since we began using the rules, but I would have chosen to use it a couple of rounds later than it was for sure. I think the Russia winter rule is equal in value to the war bonds for the US, or the Brit fighter for that matter. Only when you put the rule in place during your own games will you see that it’s definitely not a game changer, but who knows… there seems to be a lot of discussion on the strategy of when to use it. Maybe when used in a better situation, it will have a greater impact… so far, it hasn’t stopped the Germans from surrounding Russia in our games… but at least it happens later than it used to.
I think if I was playing Germany with the Russian Winter rule I might opt for the sloe (infantry/artillery) approach rather than the (tank/mech & SBR) approach.
Bumped due to changes made to original post.
