G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

[Black_Elk]

Ok just trying for something that might click. Here each major power has 4 objectives.

GERMANY:
+5 if not at War with Russia
+5 for each Axis controlled territory: Volgograd, Novgorod, Russia, Caucasus, Egypt, Iraq, Persia.
+5 for Norway/Denmark if Sweden is neutral.
+5 for Normandy/Holland if at War with US

RUSSIA:
+5 if not at war with Japan
+5 if at War and no Western units in Russia
+2 for Axis territories under Soviet control (only in Europe proper)
+3 if at War, for each open supply route: Persia, Far East, Arctic.

UK Europe
+5 if Allies control Normandy
+5 if Allies control Greece

UK Pacific
+5 if at War with Japan and Allies control Burma.
+5 if at War with Japan and Allies control Malaya.

JAPAN
+5 if not at War with West
+5 if not at War with Russia
+1 for each zero ipc Allied Pacific island under Japanese control
+10 for Hawaii

USA
+10 at War
+1 for each zero IPC Axis island under US control (Med/Pac).
+5 if at War and Allies control Normandy
+5 one time bonus for each Kamakazi island captured by Allies.

CHINA
+6 Burma Road

ITALY
+1 for each Allied territory in the Med controlled by Axis.
+5 if no Allied ships in the Med

ANZAC
+5 if at War and Allies control New Guinea.

FRANCE
+10 if Allies control Paris

That list has 25 altogether.

Axis 10 vs Allies 15. Seemed reasonable.
Could add a few more to the minor powers, or somewhere else, if that makes sense.

Any thoughts?

Ps.
Russia is basically the same as current, except added the NAP, and made the no Western units thing a bit more compelling.

For the Japanese, seemed like they need some kind of large bonus for Hawaii. Perhaps a one time bonus is better than a recurring one? Or extend this to include a large one time bonus for any of Hawaii, New South Wales, or India? They also get an island incentive and the NAP.

For UK Europe you got a second front incentive for Normandy and the Balkans. I felt like Burma and Malaya made for better UK Pac objectives, since it encourages them to stay and fight in Burma (which helps China), and to press on for Malaya if possible. The jungle war in these places pretty iconic, so seemed like they’d make good ones to focus the war in South East Asia.

For US tried to get something in there to address both zero IPC islands generally (in both theaters), and Kamakazi islands specifically. Also to get the D Day thing going.

Tried to streamline Italy, Anzac, and France to make them a bit more attractive. Italy and Anzac are less do or die here. France is mainly for endgame dynamism in Europe.

[baron Münchhausen]

+5 if at War and for each Allied control territory: New Guinea, Solomon Islands, New Britain
And why not add Malaya to this package?

I believe ANZAC need more bonus to have some significance it PTO.

Why not write it the same for UK both ETO and PTO?
UK PAC
+5 if at War with Japan and for each Allied control territory: Burma, Malaya and Kwangtung.

UK Europe
+5 if at War with Axis and for each Allied control territory: Malta, Normandy and Greece

Is it needed to be zero IPC?

+1 for each zero IPC Axis island under US control (Med/Pac).

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I think you’re right, but when the Objectives are multifaceted, it makes them harder to achieve.

Is the goal is to give Anzac some easy cash to fight more independently? The idea below would make them more powerful than OOB. OOB they are only effective once the US has rocked the money islands away from Japan  (and the fight in the Pacific is already more or less determined.)

ANZAC
+5 each, if at War with Japan and Allies control: Solomons or New Guinea/New Britain

That would give Anzac a relatively easy 10, if Japan does nothing to put a wedge between them and the Americans. New Guinea/New Britain is easier for Japan to disrupt, Solomons a bit harder. So +5 is more likely.

Ps. Yeah that wording Baron just posted is better. Reduces the total number of objectives.
Good calls!

Let’s go with that
:-D

[baron Münchhausen]

@Black_Elk:

Yeah I think you’re right, but when the Objectives are multifaceted, it makes them harder to achieve.

Is the goal is to give Anzac some easy cash to fight more independently? The idea below would make them more powerful than OOB. OOB they are only effective once the US has rocked the money islands away from Japan  (and the fight in the Pacific is already more or less determined.)

ANZAC
+5 each, if at War with Japan and Allies control: Solomons or New Guinea/New Britain

That would give Anzac a relatively easy 10, if Japan does nothing to put a wedge between them and the Americans. New Guinea is easier for Japan to disrupt, Solomons a bit harder.

Hence, it explained why these Islands were important to capture for Japan. To disrupt shipping between USA and ANZAC.
This somehow explained how it can radically affect ANZAC. Just a +1 for Japan but a big -5 for ANZAC for each Island

[baron Münchhausen]

Also, if written like this, money Islands will be included (as it was supposed OOB):
+1 for each zero ipc Allied Pacific island under Japanese control

I may goes that far as :
+5 if at War and for each Allied control territory: New Guinea, Solomon Islands, New Britain, Malaya

UK ETO:
Why not add Gibraltar (giving another reason for Italy/Germany to conquer:
+5 if at War with Axis and for each Allied control territory: Gibraltar, Malta, Normandy, and Greece

[Black_Elk]

Ok how does this feel?

GERMANY:
+5 if not at War with Russia
+5 for each Axis controlled territory: Volgograd, Novgorod, Russia, Caucasus, Egypt, Iraq, Persia.
+5 for control of Norway and Denmark if Sweden is neutral.
+5 for  control of Normandy and Holland if at War with US

RUSSIA:
+5 if not at war with Japan
+5 if at War and no Western units in Russia.
+2 for Axis territories under Soviet control.
+3 if at War, for each open supply route: Persia, Far East, Arctic.

UK Europe
+5 for each Allied controlled territory: Malta, Greece, Normandy.

UK Pacific
+5 for each Allied controlled territory, if at War with Japan: Burma, Malaya, Kwangtung

JAPAN
+5 if not at War with West
+5 if not at War with Russia
+1 for each Allied Pacific island under Japanese control
+10 for Hawaii

USA
+10 at War
+1 for each Axis island under US control (Med/Pac).
+5 if at War and Allies control Normandy
+5 one time bonus for each Kamakazi island captured by Allies.

CHINA
+6 Burma Road

ITALY
+1 for each Allied territory in the Med controlled by Axis.
+5 if no Allied ships in the Med

ANZAC
+3 for each Allied controlled territory, if at War with Japan: Solomons, New Guinea, New Britain, Malaya.

FRANCE
+10 if Allies control Paris

Right now that’s…

AXIS 10
ALLIES 13

Reducing the total number of entries by 5 NOs. But increasing the variety and gameplay significance of the NOs in play.

[baron Münchhausen]

UK Europe
+5 each if Allies control Malta, Greece or Normandy

Written that way, it means you only get +5 IPCs if you control any amongst these three.

In my mind, it will be +5 for each TTy.

Also, ANZAC may be lower like:

+3 if at War and for each Allied control territory: New Guinea, Solomon Islands, New Britain, Malaya

+5 for each Allied control territory: Gibraltar, Malta, Normandy, and Greece

[Black_Elk]

Ok edited the above.

Does that feel cool?

[baron Münchhausen]

@Black_Elk:

Ok edited the above.

Does that feel cool?

Yep, far better.
What about:
ITALY
+1 for each Allied territory in the Med or Middle-East controlled by Axis.

This depict how all oil field resources were needed.

Is it more historical if Middle-east was included in spreading communism?
+2 for Axis territories under Soviet control (only in Europe or Middle-East proper)

This one need to be defined, what is an open route?
+3 if at War, for each open supply route: Persia, Far East, Arctic.

That one means +10 if both TTys in Axis hands?
+5 for Normandy/Holland if at War with US

For these two I would add: uninterrupted possession
+5 each for uninterrupted possession of Normandy and Holland, if at War with US

[Black_Elk]

Ok I edit again. New draft list in post below.

I just removed the restriction for the Soviets to expand communism. Really seems like if they go through the effort to get to Africa they probably deserve it. It’s gamey but I don’t really like putting a restriction on it anyway. This way it works for Asia too.

For the Mid East I think that is pretty much coveted already by the German NO. Keeping it focused on the Med suggest more the dream of a new Roman Empire.

I removed the backslash and used proper conjunction “and” , for NOs that deal with controlling teo territories, which is what I meant originally.

[Black_Elk]

@Black_Elk:

Ok how does this feel?

GERMANY:
+5 if not at War with Russia
+5 for each Axis controlled territory: England, Volgograd, Novgorod, Russia, Caucasus, Egypt, Iraq, Persia.
+5 for control of Norway and Denmark together if Sweden is neutral.
+5 for  control of Normandy and Holland together if at War with US

RUSSIA:
+5 if not at war with Japan
+5 if at War and no Western units in Russia.
+2 for Axis territories under Soviet control.
+3 if at War, for each open supply route: Persia, Far East, Arctic.

UK Europe
+5 for each Allied controlled territory: Gibraltar, Malta, Greece, Normandy.

UK Pacific
+5 for each Allied controlled territory, if at War with Japan: Burma, Malaya, Kwangtung.

JAPAN
+5 if not at War with West
+5 if not at War with Russia
+1 for each Allied Pacific island under Japanese control
+10 for Hawaii

USA
+10 at War
+1 for each Axis island under US control (Med/Pac).
+5 if at War and Allies control Normandy
+5 one time bonus for each Kamakazi island captured by Allies.

CHINA
+6 Burma Road

ITALY
+1 for each Allied territory in the Med controlled by Axis.
+5 if no Allied ships in the Med

ANZAC
+3 for each Allied controlled territory, if at War with Japan: Solomons, New Guinea, New Britain, Malaya.

FRANCE
+10 if Allies control Paris

Right now that’s…

AXIS 10
ALLIES 13

Reducing the total number of entries by 5 NOs. But increasing the variety and gameplay significance of the NOs in play.

Seem alright?

I would still like to include all the thematic blurbs for each of these. But I think a simplified wording for the objective itself is better as a mnemonic device, than having a bunch of different names/stories that describe functionally similar bonuses.

I will edit and expand the “supply routes for Russia” description. The one above was just shorthand for stuff already inclouded in HR the package. Basically each has a territory and sz associated with it.

[baron Münchhausen]

Why do you need that Germany be at war with US to give Normandy NO?

For the Mid East I think that is pretty much coveted already by the German NO. Keeping it focused on the Med suggest more the dream of a new Roman Empire.

+1 for each Allied territory in the Med controlled by Axis.
Does it include all North African TTs like Egypt and, bordering Med TT like Syria?

Do you think adding Gibraltar is too much here?

+5 for each Allied controlled territory: Gibraltar, Malta, Greece, Normandy.
We talked about it when discussing VCs. (Free Town for a Gibraltar NO)

I would add this one:
+5 for each Axis controlled territory: England , Volgograd, Novgorod, Russia, Caucasus, Egypt, Iraq, Persia.
(Sea Lion is so a pyrrhic victory as it seems.)

I found it far much simpler to follow.
I hope G40 pros will comment.
Maybe ask a revision on G40 Forum once ready.

I threw a line there:
Re: G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37553.msg1642276#msg1642276

[LHoffman]

I am not interested in giving the USSR consistent free cash, but what do you think about giving Russia more money for the “no Western Allies in USSR territories” NO?

I think the incentive to keep the other Allies out needs to be significant. It may be possible to do this through means other than NOs, but there is one specifically geared for it.

[baron Münchhausen]

@LHoffman:

I am not interested in giving the USSR consistent free cash, but what do you think about giving Russia more money for the “no Western Allies in USSR territories” NO?

I think the incentive to keep the other Allies out needs to be significant. It may be possible to do this through means other than NOs, but there is one specifically geared for it.

Do you think 10 IPCs will be a sufficient incentive to not land Allies aircrafts in Russia?
It is enough to built 1 Fg per turn.

[LHoffman]

@Baron:

@LHoffman:

I am not interested in giving the USSR consistent free cash, but what do you think about giving Russia more money for the “no Western Allies in USSR territories” NO?

I think the incentive to keep the other Allies out needs to be significant. It may be possible to do this through means other than NOs, but there is one specifically geared for it.

Do you think 10 IPCs will be a sufficient incentive to not land Allies aircrafts in Russia?
It is enough to built 1 Fg per turn.

Yes. I would say we could subtract that extra 5 from elsewhere, but with USSR’s NOs, that is hard to do. It’s a delicate balance so as not to give them too much.

I don’t like the idea of completely legislating restrictions on Allied units in the USSR. Incentivizing is better, but it has its limits.

[baron Münchhausen]

Solomon Islands must be Allied for ANZAC to get either of its two island objectives. So. . .

1. Solomon Islands, Gilbert, Samoa, Fiji = 3 PUS

2. Solomon Islands, New Britain, Dutch New Guinea, New Guinea = 3 PUS

Thus, Japan can negate both objectives by taking and holding Solomon

This is from Balanced Mode 3.0

Do you think we should put Dutch New Guinea into ANZAC NO?
+3 for each Allied controlled territory, if at War with Japan: Solomons, New Guinea, Dutch New Guinea, New Britain, Malaya.

[baron Münchhausen]

@LHoffman:

@Baron:

@LHoffman:

I am not interested in giving the USSR consistent free cash, but what do you think about giving Russia more money for the “no Western Allies in USSR territories” NO?

I think the incentive to keep the other Allies out needs to be significant. It may be possible to do this through means other than NOs, but there is one specifically geared for it.

Do you think 10 IPCs will be a sufficient incentive to not land Allies aircrafts in Russia?
It is enough to built 1 Fg per turn.

Yes. I would say we could subtract that extra 5 from elsewhere, but with USSR’s NOs, that is hard to do. It’s a delicate balance so as not to give them too much.

I don’t like the idea of completely legislating restrictions on Allied units in the USSR. Incentivizing is better, but it has its limits.

It is not that tragic because Germans C5 bombers will do a lot of damage on russian ICs.

[Black_Elk]

Sure, if it’s popular and already established in balanced mod, then just make it the same I’d say for Anzac

For the German Atlantic Wall bonus (Normandy and Holland), thought at War with US might make sense to prevent an immediate cash windfall for the already hefty Germany economy. Also makes sense for a project that was scaled up at around the same time Allies are beginning to think about Overlord.The British Normandy NO already provides an incentive for Germany to take the TT as soon as possible. And gives UK a reason to do a little Dunkirk’n if they can.
But if it makes more sense from the get go that’s fine by me.

I agree that the no units in Soviet territories remains problematic. Perhaps a solution is to increase the Supply bonuses but make them dependant on No Allied units. This is similar to the OOB NO, except the cash on offer would be greater.

Or maybe even better what if we had a couple generic “penalties” to reinforce the bonuses above, meant to discourage ahistorical play patterns?

Something like this…

Sphere of Influence Violations:

Russia -10 ipcs if Western Units in Soviet territories.

UK -10 ipcs if Soviet Units in Western territories.

Germany -10 ipcs if Japanese units in European Axis territories.

Japan -10 ipcs if European Axis units in Japanese territories.

NAP Violations:

Russia -15 ipcs one time aggressor penalty for breaking non aggression treaty.

Japan -15 ipcs one time aggressor penalty for breaking non aggression treaty.

Or something along those lines? Where IPCs are removed if the team commits a violation. This way there are no hard rules restrictions, only bonuses and a few key penalties.

[baron Münchhausen]

IDK if Barney can easily introduce it into Triple A.
Also, -15 seems too harsh.
-10 is enough because it means a -15 TUV swing losing bonus too.

I say Germany NO is simpler without adding US at war.
In counterpart, giving +10 for Russia xenophobia can be a way to compensate both.

What do you think about adding my other suggestions (Gibraltar, etc.)?

[Black_Elk]

OK full list

Sphere of Influence Violations:
-10 ipcs from Russian income, if Western units in Soviet territories.
-10 ipcs from British income, if Soviet units in Western territories.
-10 ipcs from German income, if Japanese units in European Axis territories.
-10 ipcs from Japanese income, if European Axis units in Japanese territories.

NAP Violations:
-10 ipcs one time aggressor penalty if Japan is first to break the non aggression treaty.
-10 ipcs one time aggressor penalty if Russia is first to break the non aggression treaty.

Objective Bonuses

GERMANY:
+5 if not at War with Russia
+5 for each Axis controlled territory: England, Volgograd, Novgorod, Russia, Caucasus, Egypt, Iraq, Persia.
+5 for control of Norway and Denmark together, if Sweden is neutral.
+5 for control of Normandy and Holland together.

RUSSIA:
+5 if not at war with Japan.
+2 for Axis territories under Soviet control.
+5 if at War, for each open supply route: Persian Corridor, Pacific Route ALSIB Northern Trace, Arctic Route.

UK EUROPE:
+5 for each Allied controlled territory: Gibraltar, Malta, Greece, Normandy.

UK PACIFIC:
+5 for each Allied controlled territory, if at War with Japan: Burma, Malaya, Kwangtung.

JAPAN:
+5 if not at War with West.
+5 if not at War with Russia.
+1 for each Allied Pacific island under Japanese control.
+10 if Japan controls Hawaii.

USA:
+10 at War
+1 for each Axis island under US control (Pacific and European theaters).
+5 if at War and Allies control Normandy
+5 one time bonus for each Kamakazi island captured by Allies.

CHINA:
+6 Burma Road.

ITALY:
+1 for each Allied territory that touches the Mediterranean Sea controlled by Axis.
+5 if no Allied ships in the Mediterranean.

ANZAC:
+3 for each Allied controlled territory, if at War with Japan: Solomons, New Guinea, Dutch New Guinea, New Britain, Malaya.

FRANCE:
+10 if Allies control Paris.

Total Axis Objectives: 10
Total Allied Objectives: 12
Total Sphere of Influcen/NAP penalties: 6

Exactly 28 entries, same as OOB. But covering way more ground.