The Representational Scale on one Turn in Axis and Allies

If the axis has 30 points at the end of any turn they win the game. They have 10 turns to achieve it. Here is the points chart with bonuses.

F312C176-91BB-45BF-AAFE-DAD740F6925F.jpeg

Not looking to change this as of now.
Basically trying to get an idea on what would have Russia done with factory and resources.

I like it now (will be tested in 2 weeks) where Moscow falls the factory goes to Samara ( build 2 max ) and Germany receives half of Russia’s income. If Germany bombs the 3 Russian oil derricks ( 2 icps each ), ( plus 4 icps convoy box ) then they would lose another 10 icps on capture. Also would need to repair oil derricks in order to get the Middle east oil bonus point.

But also if Germany is bombing the 2 factories that are moving have to be repaired first so this weakens Russia builds too.

In a game did move Moscow factory out on turn before Germany attacked Moscow and moved it to Samara anyway. This way Germany would not get factory on capture. Then Russia was able to hold Stalingrad and oil while allies took back Paris and Pacific allies liberated on there side.

Keep in mind if Russia moved 2 factories to Urals and Samara factory with Stalingrad factory with Tankograd they can build 12 units and counter with retreating figs from Moscow battle.
That is key to. Figs leave Moscow battle no combat with Dog fighting but then Russia needs those figs to counter or defend Samara/Stalingrad and Germany needs to get at least half his planes back to hold West Germany or Berlin.
Also if Russia receives there 2 NA’s of Lend Lease and Conscripts ( above pic ) plus Lend Lease roll at end of turn gets 3 more pieces to add to map.
All kinds of action going on which I want in game based on nobody really has this scenario in there game unless I missed it.

@Ichabod:

@Argothair:

Ichabod, your idea of boosting capital territories’ income is interesting and worth considering as an alternate way to balance the game, although if we only boost capital territory income, then the Axis will have no incentive to fight over peripheral territories, which will become even more irrelevant to the war. As I’ve mentioned on other threads, it bothers me that Australia, South Africa, the Urals, and Archangel wind up being so irrelevant to the game, even though in reality they were a major component of the Allies’ industrial and logistical capacity.

I agree with you that we should not be boosting any territories that would wind up just being a gift to the Axis, because the Axis have plenty of advantages already, but I think it is actually very hard for the Axis to stack Archangel in the early game – it’s three territories away from Berlin and its adjacent to Moscow, so if the Russians can’t at least trade Archangel (to share the extra income), then you’ve probably reached the endgame.

I assure you, that as the Axis I will be trying to take as many territories as possible to boost my income even if the value is still the original 1 or 2 IPCs. I’ve played 42.2 only a few times. I grew up on Classic/Revised and it’s basically just an updated version. The 2x I played 42.2 however were enough to demonstrate to me how ridiculously unbalanced it is, way worse than G40 (which is my go to game).

Start small, make the capital territories an increased value of 5 IPCs and see if it doesn’t unbalance the game.

I’m telling you if you make irrelevant territories like Archangel or South Africa, or Australia worth more, the Axis will just capture those places, and poof, there goes your game balance and it’s even more lopsided. Archangel was captured on round 2 or 3 of the 2 games I played. It’s easy for Germany to push Russia back in 42.2; heck a caveman could do it.

Axis can grab lands such as South Africa or Australia but I don’t think it might be optimal for Axis.
Such are out of position and, if Germany waste money in Africa, this is less units against Russia.
Same for Japan wasting resources against US instead of crushing India, then going Caucasus or Moscow.

I do agree about Archangel and Karelia, it is on the north way toward Moscow.

I agree with the initial premise of this post. Russia could definitely use a boost in 1942.2

@Der:

Or you could give Russia production bonuses after holding out a while, to represent the increased production over time. Like after round three Russia gets 3 bonus IPCs per round, after round six they get 6 IPCs per round, etc.

This is one of the more interesting ideas I’ve heard in a while. I like it for its simplicity. You could play this way with a direct correspondence between Round and IPCs awarded.

Round 1 = 1 ipc
Round 2 = 2 ipcs
Round 3 = 3 ipcs
Round 4 = 4 ipcs
Round 10 = 10 ipcs
and so on

this would mean that the effect on the early game would be fairly minimal, but each round that the game progresses, the Russian advantage would become more potent. The higher boosts would also kick in at precisely the time when the Russians need more loot, since all their land has been snatched. This would give the Axis a strong incentive to attack early, rather than trying to wait it out. So for example, as Germany, if you had choice between a somewhat risky attack on Moscow, or waiting 3 more rounds for Japan to back it up, you might just go for the attack rather than facing the extra lend lease loot that Russia receives. Each round you push the game out the larger the benefit becomes, which would encourage faster game resolution, at least on the part of Axis. Not sure might work.

I support basically anything that gives the Russians a boost on this board.

My favored change (in terms of a hard and fast set up adjustment) is to just give the Russians a bomber. Which seems to work fairly well at balancing this board in my playgroup :-D

Tanks don’t have to be adjacent to their attacking territory either. They can move 2 spaces to attack. For example, say you have a tank in Germany and you are attacking Baltic states. You can move through Poland with your tank and attack Baltic States.

well you are right in some points and may be wrong in others. My opinion is that is excellent to develop new ideas, but you are just altering too many points.

Try to make fewer changes and them we can all together develop the game instead of replacing the game.

In terms of movement the port works the same as AAP, its not a new zone.

Under these rules the only way to get them out of port forcibly is by “dislodgement” by taking the territory by land, the naval units are put out to sea which will cause a naval battle on the following turn if enemy ships are blockading.

Also, i would limit air attacks at one round, with AA providing flak fire if present in the territory.

So under these rules the only time a port would be under attack is if you have like a single ship defending or overwhelming odds by air power knowing these planes will be loses

I used the OPs NAs for the first time last night. We rolled 2 d6 to see which NAs each country would get. I was Germany and got the V2 Rockets. Instead of having the UK surrender the IPCs to the bank, we did like a SBR and placed damage markers under the IC. Together with a 1 bomber SBR, the UK IC had a stack of 12 damage markers under it which the UK decided that all damage markers needed to be removed. We really enjoyed playing with these and will be adding them in again two at a time until we are familiar with all of them and then have all of the NAs for each country in play. Nice job and thanks for posting the NAs. These kinds of things make AA42 an even better game.

that’s one of the great things about this forum.  It practically already is a house rules “think thank”.