@nikola1975 said in PTV L25 PlayOff: Surfer (Allies) vs Nikola1975 (Axis +9):
@surfer Yes :) Let’s see how you react.
Ok. Let’s try this. Scramble orders?
G40 League House Rule project
-
@Shin:
The Chinese can’t walk into india, though - unless that changed with this ruleset.
Kinda silly tho. They depend on that route for ipc, but other then the flying tigers can’t fully defend it.
-
Right, China is still not allowed into India, but can defend it with flying tigers (After all, those were American)
-
Tweaks to the house-ruled game since playtest #1 started are incorporated in the spreadsheet and highlighted in yellow
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydGh6d2NwRDJRRzBteEsyU1EtNGhXVUE#gid=2 -
Good point - adding 3 cities that are in proximity to Japan’s normal objectives and adding only 2 cities to VC conditions, makes it even easier for Japan to win. They wouldn’t need NSW or Hawaii.
But I was thinking mainly in terms of world prominence of cities, not game play, figuring game play would take care of itself.
Changing Sumatra to Java, after doing a little homework.
Thinking about changing Phillipines to New Zealand.
I don’t mind the idea of Japan having more trouble with China, though, and not having to get Sydney or Hawaii. If China is harder to hold down, then it’s harder to hold on to Manchuria, Kiangsu, Hong Kong, Malaya, Java, India, Japan, and Phillipines (New Zealand) all for one round.
Japan’s starting forces could always be reduced a little more. I’ve already taken away 2 infantry and 2 tacs… I’m just saying we don’t have to consider Victory City changes in a vacuum. Other things can be changed at the same time to keep Japan from winning too easily. Don’t worry, I hate Pacific victories as much as any other player
-
Sydney can’t get 3 for Malaya, but can get the NO for Hong Kong? Seems odd.
-
And what about Korea, Siam and FIC.
-
@Nozdormu:
Sydney can’t get 3 for Malaya, but can get the NO for Hong Kong? Seems odd.
Sydney can’t collect income from Hong Kong, therefore not the NO for Hong Kong either
Sydney can’t get the NO for Malaya, but can collect the 3 income if there is no convoy disruption. Can be disrupted for 3 damage if it’s Sydney collecting.
Siam, FIC, Korea can be collected by Sydney just as Brazil, Morocco, Berlin, or Persia can
It’s just the core territories close to India that can’t be collected by Sydney
-
Is there some way to see all your changes to the standard (official) rules?
I don’t want to read through 80 pages, just to give my 2 cents and contribute.
-
Yes there is! Here’s the link with the rule changes.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydGh6d2NwRDJRRzBteEsyU1EtNGhXVUE#gid=2
-
Added an intro page to the front of the spreadsheet that gives executive summary of the changes for players checking it out for the first time.
-
Gamerman, I wonder if you’ve seen these house rules made by Young Grasshopper. There’s some pretty good ideas here worth stealing in my opinion.
Making the win requirement 12 VCs (in both boards, naturally) for both Allies and Axis after round 5 is nice, if only because it gives the Allies an achievable win condition besides “Ugh, I give up. You win.”
-
Whoops! Forgot the link
-
Cool, thanks Shin Ji
I have also saved this thread http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32483.0;topicseen
which I thought had good ideas, but haven’t read it in detail yetI am hesitant to play test the house rule game myself, because it’s so different from the 2nd edition game…. I’m trying to be active in the league. Are you having any luck finding someone to play the house rule game with?
-
Oh, I just heard in the video that they agree with me that the no subs in the Atlantic NO should be re-instated, and also German NO for control of London :-)
-
They also have Mongolia as its own neutral bloc, which got me to thinking
I am going to add a rule that an Axis power must be at war with Russia to invade Mongolia. This prevents Japan exploitation of Mongolia while ignoring Russia, and makes sense, given the Russian/Mongolian ties
-
I wonder, have you given any thought to reducing the amount of back-and-forth required to finish a round?
If we kept the turn order just like it is in standard, but remove France and Anzac, then you get this:
Germany
Russia
Japan
rest of Allies
Italy/GermanyIt could speed things up quite a bit without changing the flow of the game in any meaningful way.
I was also thinking that while Spain should be tied to South America as you’ve been doing so far, it might be good to tie it to Sweden and Switzerland as well. Just to give the Allies some pause before invading it.
-
I prefer to prevent the automatic can-opener possibilities to reducing turnaround…
Agree it is a problem to have Spain and South America tied, since Allies will invade Spain every time. Tying in Sweden and Switzerland works, yes
-
But Italy is already a can-opener for Germany as it is. It’s not like France or ANZAC are going to be in their way.
But there is something to be said for having meaningful Allied turns every time.
Hrm…
-
@Shin:
But Italy is already a can-opener for Germany as it is. It’s not like France or ANZAC are going to be in their way.
?? France and ANZAC are no more! USA goes between Italy and Germany
But there is something to be said for having meaningful Allied turns every time.
Hrm…
-
And yes, France and ANZAC actually can quite often disrupt Italy can openers in 2nd edition! I’ve done it and seen it a lot
Suggested Topics
