AARHE: Phase 3: Income

[Imperious Leader]

Thats not realistic. Tank Factories dont stop churning out tanks of the capital falls. The raw materials dont come from the capital. The nations resolve to conclude peace or its ability to stop making military hardware are the crucial factors. Even the french fought with their own units as free french years after losing Paris. They even landed entire armored divisions ( primarilly outfitted from britian, but also helped from income from french colonies not axis occupied.

[tekkyy]

Maybe if you loose a capital you can only build infantry up to the value of the land?

Infantry is no longer constructed at IC (Industrial Complex) but VC (Victory City).
Each VC has points (VCP) which determines how many infantry they can raise there, per turn.
Whether you have control of your capital you just can’t build 10 INF at UK, for example.

[Imperious Leader]

Yes that should be it as far as what happens.

[tekkyy]

@Imperious:

Further i was thinking about convoy boxes (ala AA europe/ Pacific) I know we have addressed economic attacks on individual territorys, but the sea lanes also represent the interception of income that was dependant on colonies ( mostly UK, Japan, and USA) but we could/ should add a convoy box for italy that could be attacked from malta. This would be accurate. attacking the box could be just roll d6= lost IPC or roll 1-2=1 ipc, 3-4=2 ipc, 5-6=4 ipc lost

well we’ve yet to tune SBR (Strategic Bombing Raid) but planned for phase 3

so far with our blockade rule –-> with respect to naval income intercept
income source: islands are easily affected
income destination: islands are easily affected

its currently on/off system
we were going to add a D6 component to it but have yet to

[tekkyy]

@Guerrilla:

Maybe… I was even thinking that it was a “transfer” point for foreign IPC’s, so that either you build Oversea IPC’s to get “bigger” equipment or spend Commonwealth money on Infantry… It can transfer up to a certain amount of cash per turn out of it, which can be off board and transferred to the home country at the beginning of the next round… It then can be preyed on… The IPC’s are represented by chits…

Yes very applicable to UK and Japan.
Island homeland.
Dependent on trade.

But I feel its difficult with convoy boxes.
In AAPacific and AAEurope with had smaller sea zones (more sea zones).

[Guerrilla Guy]

Don’t make it convoy boxes, make it an offboard players aid… For Britain there is a African Convoy, Indian Convoy, Australian Convoy, and Canadian Convoy… Each of those have a starting place (India for the Indian Convoy, etc.), and a chit to track movement… The enemy has to search roll for them to attack…

GG

[Imperious Leader]

Yea that offboard thing is better… because it does not involve players to change their maps. Player aids are the way to go. WE only have to delininate the different oceans so that when you have a sub or ship then they can roll for the possibility of sinking “abstracted” ships in shipping lanes… so only the location need to be identified.

[Guerrilla Guy]

The Location is “known” (a chit represents its path, allowing players to cover them…).  Strays in shipping lanes rarely were hit, they usually traveled together to avoid that… After a Convoy reaches the Home Factory, it can cash in the IPC’s and is removed from the board, to be used later when they want to start a new shipment… This allows for several convoys to be shipping out at once, and since they all move in combat move it doesn’t complicate it anymore… The Convoy is now placed face up representing its arrival in port, and is considered unloading… The enemy still gets a chance to interdict, but now it is covered by CAP and AA Guns… That is my basic idea…

GG

[tekkyy]

whether its actual convoy box or just identify locations
its still like convoy

the question wouldn’t convoy reroute to go around hostile sea regions?

---

we could try to incorporate that convoy aspect by tuning the current blockade rule

currently the blockade rule basically imply that if a territories naval port is blocked, it uses a different naval port at adjacent territory

if thats not realistic we can change that

if possible I am hoping a simple global-style rule to model convoy

[tekkyy]

I suspect germany would not take part in this, but lend lease aid to Soviets could take a hit.

Lend Lease is already sinkable by combat

[Guerrilla Guy]

The "Dodging of Hostile SZ’s would be represented clearly if you had a chit represent convoys… The player could do that directly…

GG

[tekkyy]

draft some details for your rule
I feel the blockade rule does a bit of that already

[Guerrilla Guy]

The blockade rule only allows income to come in, it doesn’t represent Sub Fleets preying on Allied Shipping. As of right now, I am still formulating the idea for the convoy, so I will get back to you on that, mainly cause I think even making it a chit would make it more complex, so I am having to rethink how it works… Possibly making it all ofboard would be better…

GG

[Guerrilla Guy]

Convoys:
Convoys are represented offboard as the transportation of IPC’s from Commonwealth and Foreign Holding Territories to the “Home Country” for distribution in the wartime economy; They are represented by playing chits, representing 5 IPC’s. These chits are payed for during the Purchase units phased and are placed during Place new units, just like Military units. These units can start on particular spaces designated for there country, and “transport” the IPC’s of Adjacent Territories or Islands in SZ’s adjacent. These IPC’s are now mobile IPC’s. These have a movement of 2 and move during Non-Combat. They can be attacked by Air and Sea units via search rolls. Basic Draft, comments?

GG

[tekkyy]

so these chits go from where to where?
movement of 2 per turn means how long before the income arrives?
the starting map now includes chits in the ocean?

the blockade rule covers both saving and spending of income, to capital or IC/VC respectively
currently its a on/off system
we could introduce die rolls

[Guerrilla Guy]

so these chits go from where to where?
Britain has a “Port” in India, AE, Australia, South Africa, and East Canada… Japan has one in Kwangtung, Philipines, and Solomon Is. The Americans have one in Brazil and Hawaii. And the Italians (if used) have one in Lybia. Instead of having a “set amount”, there amount is represented by the chips.

movement of 2 per turn means how long before the income arrives?
The movement could be increased to 3-4 I would have no problem with that…

the starting map now includes chits in the ocean?
no they are bought later…

the blockade rule covers both saving and spending of income, to capital or IC/VC respectively
currently its a on/off system
we could introduce die rolls
I understand, but it doesn’t allow for preying by Sub Fleets and I think that my system would represent that in a simple system that meshes with the current movement and combat rules… Convoys can still be protected by fleets, giving the British and Japanese an even greater incentive to buy shipping…

GG

[tekkyy]

you can make it 3-4 but then now you can’t esort them very well

so is this like extra income?
like you pay 3 IPC and get a chip (worth 5 IPC) and place it at India?

---

by the way as you mentioned “port” I thought about the blockade rule
currently it allows a path containing any combination of land/sea

like Australia’s income go via sea to any of East Africa, then go via land to any of West Africa, then go via sea to UK
or it would go thru the Pacific, then via land through US and Canada, then via sea to UK

is that realistic?

maybe we need to identify WWII sea ports

[Guerrilla Guy]

How do the subs hunt these convoys then? (under your system)

These are actually paid for, there is no additional cost besides the transfer of IPC’s, so technically your just delaying when you’ll get them so you can get more income… Since several convoys are going at once, the enemy will always have a chance to prey on them…

GG

[Jennifer]

@Imperious:

Thats not realistic. Tank Factories dont stop churning out tanks of the capital falls. The raw materials dont come from the capital. The nations resolve to conclude peace or its ability to stop making military hardware are the crucial factors. Even the french fought with their own units as free french years after losing Paris. They even landed entire armored divisions ( primarilly outfitted from britian, but also helped from income from french colonies not axis occupied.

Hmm, no they could still be producing, but when the capital falls odds are the entire production system grinds to a sudden halt because people are worried.  The idea of building infantry would be to represent guerillas and partisans in non-domesticated provinces that are recruited to help liberate their capital.

[Imperious Leader]

Ok heres the first scenario:

In 1940 Germany invaded England and took it over… Churchill and the British people fight from her colonies and from their additional troops and equipment are constructed. Do you think for a second that if england falls … thats it… they just roll over and cry uncle Adolf?  NO they fight on from their colonies where much of their support comes from. Only the people on england now have a different fight as you stated … as partisans…

If Moscow falls Stalin takes the train to Gorki or Kazan and fights from his base in the Urals. The ability to raise additional troops is not encumbered only in the respect that Stalin still has factories and a population to draw recruits from. Once all the factories are gone its a completely a different matter… no equipment = no army. thats the key difference.

If Canada, India, Australia, have fallen then i would agree with you. these colonies are all part of the roots of the British Empire. They are interdependant economically and militarily. Capital falling as a means to conquer a nation is a fossilized concept that is better regulated to a “romantic war” like WW1. Of course it has some effects but a modern nation is not that dependant upon one or two key cities.