ONLY Axis BBs 2 hit @ start…

Greetings friends,

I have finished my first version of the Solitaire variant. I’m affraid I still have to test it. If there is any volunteer here to test it I will thank you!

Here you have it: http://www.mediafire.com/folder/jxx1jyxyhsbyh/Axis_%26_Allies

There are 3 files:

Rules. Helpsheet and specific AI rules for Axis & Allies 1940 Pacific and Europe. Markers sheet.

I will thank you feedback about rules if you can test them, your corrections and suggestions too.

Best regards,

Jose Manuel

Thanks! I mostly agree with your comment about per-dice research efficiency; the only reason I didn’t include additional penalties for triple-stacking your scientists is for the sake of simplicity. If you want to play with a -3 penalty, or (even better) a -4 penalty that rounds up to a -3 penalty if you roll three 1’s, then go right ahead!

Giving each Axis nation 3 tokens and each Allied nation 2 tokens tends to give the Axis an early edge in research (they will manage their first couple of breakthroughs earlier than the Allies will), but then the Allies will start to catch up and then overtake the Axis later in the war, because the Axis scientists (on average) will be more “crowded” and will take more stacking penalties.

You could bump Radar to 14 pts. or even to 16 pts. if you really want to, but there are limited opportunities to make full use of the potential synergy. E.g., suppose Germany is using a “Dark Skies” approach to ward off Allied fleets with its enormous Nazi bomber squadrons. Britain might want both Radar and Anti-Aircraft Cruisers to help protect its fleet. Russia, on the other hand, only needs Radar – they’re not going to build any cruisers. Similarly, Russia doesn’t have much use for Jet Fighters, since if it’s suffering from a strategic bombing campaign, it won’t be able to afford much in the way of extra fighters. There’s also the concern that “Heavy Bombers” has always been an overpowered technology in every version of Axis & Allies that had tech. I tried to err in the opposite direction by making the anti-aircraft techs roughly as powerful as the aircraft-enhancement techs!

There is an “Improved Artillery” tech in some of the OOB versions of Axis & Allies, and I’ve never seen anyone buy it, except maybe Russia, who really does have to count every dollar and might not be able to afford enough artillery to fully power its infantry stacks. It is really challenging to fully exploit the advantage of 2:1 artillery support is that it’s really hard to maintain the desired ratio. E.g. if I have a stack of 10 infantry and 5 artillery, then after one round of combat, I probably have something like 2 infantry and 5 artillery, and the extra artillery support becomes moot. It stays moot on defense, too, when those artillery try to hold the ground they just captured. But if I have a stack of 20 infantry and 5 artillery instead, then my army is hugely inefficient – even with 2:1 artillery support, I’m only generating 40 pips of punch on 25 units, so I’m going to give you multiple rounds of combat in which to score hits and wear down my army.

You get the same problem in reverse if you want to only boost the artillery’s native attack power. With a stack of, e.g., 8 infantry and 3 artillery, the tech would only give you +3 pips of punch – it’s just not very exciting. You could try attacking with a stack of all artillery, e.g., 10 artillery for $40, but that just seems weird and un-thematic.

Anyway, let me know if you try out the rules, with or without some modifications! I’d be curious to see how they work in live play. I’m defending my rules so you have the benefit of my opinions, but they’re just opinions, and ultimately the house rules are there for everyone to enjoy however they like…if you think you’ll have more fun tweaking the costs or nerfing a couple of the techs, then go with what seems fun! :-)

I think its worth it, just for the warhawks hehe. Though I agree that the game would have been a much better investment (and a better play too) if it had included a unique artillery sculpt. The OOB 1941 game benefits immeasurably from the inclusion of artillery in the roster. I use 1942.2 art sculpts when I play it.

Depends where you buy the game, but if you can pick up two copies and ship them at the same time, you get a decent number of fighters and tanks. You’re still left holding the bag on Italy, Anzac etc unfortunately.

Revised has some nice colored units for UK and Germany, with lime greens and grays. I still like the mini stukas. The limes for China and the Grays for Vichy or Romania can be cool, you could probably get some mileage out of them.

I wish HBG made a few more pieces to supplement the older boxed materials in similar sculpt colors. But you can still find some decent stuff there, might be cheaper. I like 1941 though. Its map is a crazy shuck-fest. Sucks to buy 2 or more copies just to get sculpts, since then you have another map you don’t need, but hey at least you can snap up a couple extra roundels in the process  :-D

I’m still surprised that A&A doesn’t put out supplemental materials for the regular boardgames. They did it for the miniatures game with the larger sculpts, but not the boardgame, and the boardgame is the only one I play! I like my sculpts tiny and matching the official materials when possible. ;)

SS…you’re the man!!!

That non-aggro pact looks a little familiar.

But it should add this: the 2 signatories cannot allow their allies to attack the other signatory from their territory.

That is, for example, UK bombers based on Russian soil cannot attack Japanese units, nor land in Russia from such an attack from elsewhere.

The treaty should remain in force for as long as the power gaining the right to attack wishes.  For example if Berlin falls Russia and Japan are only at war when Russia declares war on Japan, which it can do at any time.  Japan would not have the right to attack until Russia declared war, or until it’s own criteria were achieved.
(Supposing Russia wanted to see a powerful Italy beated down a bit, or rebuild it’s own forces up after a hard German campaign, before risking war with a bloated Japanese monster.)

ok good.

no we don’t need LHTR, because they uses different victory conditions and has different takes because its tailored for Tournament games. Our rules superseed LHTR EXCEPT for issues that we don’t clarify, that document overrides.

Thanks for the clarification C_F. It will definitely even the game out or even favors the Axis. Africa is much more attractive since the value essentially doubles for the Axis. The Axis can exploit the many odd IPCs territories. The Axis will catch up to the Allies economically in no time while having a superior number of units.