Six new tech options?!

Yes I agree that more VCs needed in PTO and Japan should have to work to get that 1 more VC in the PTO. I do have a VC Capital in Manchuria for my 40 game but with not having 18 inf in area it doesn�t seem to get pressured much.
Singapore is out of the question due to Japan being so strong by islands from G40 game reports. Got to make Japan earn it. Just some thoughts.

I have found 2 changes to the map that enhance the game play - thought I would share.

Darfur - Minor Aligned with Ottoman Empire (1) IPC.  This new territory sits between French Equatorial Africa and Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, with Belgian Congo keeping a border on AES.  This change provides more action in Africa, without it just becoming a big waste of space by turn 3 or 4 and an IPC pump for the British.

Sea zone 31 - A new sea zone that splits SZ17 in half.  SZ31 borders SZ16 to the west, SZ17 to north, SZ19 to the east, and Libya/Egypt to the south.  All of Greece borders the new SZ31 and SZ20.  This change provides much more freedom of movement of any CP ships that leave their home ports from mine rolls.  From the Allied powers standpoint - protects from an AH early thrust into the Black Sea or Eastern Med.

On Tanks.

Some players will for sure claim that if the opponent choose your casualties, nobody will buy Tanks any more, never again. The land battles will look like they did in the MB Classic games, with huge infantry stacks only. So how do we fix this, and I for sure don’t want to mess with the units cost or combat values. A Tanks should always cost 6 IPC, move 2 spaces, attack on 3 or less,  defend on 3 or less, and of course be able to Blitz. The only way to make rational players keep buying Tanks is to give them one more ability, and again from the A&A 1914 game with established and playtested rules.

An attacking Tank can absorb one extra hit. So it takes 2 hits to kill a tank.

This would be very strong if Tanks was chosen last as casualties, but perfect when chosen first. Tanks are actually the fodder that break through the enemy line, and make a hole in the line that the follow up infantry can exploit. Tanks that survived a real battle got so worn down that they would need months of repair before they could be used again. A Tank should be a hard hitting one round only unit. A Tank need a lot of fuel, supply and maintenance to work, and is really expensive to keep running. But in combined operations with aircrafts, like Tactical Bombers, they really put a lot of harm to the enemy. Tanks win battles. But they get used doing so. Infantry on the other hand live of the land and is cheap, and they can go on and go on forever, but they don’t have a strong punch.

So if you want to win a battle, you need air superiority, this is true for both attacker and defender.
If you want to successfully attack a territory, you also need Tanks and Tacs in Combined operation that gives a heavy punch to the defending stack. Since attacking Tanks will also absorb one extra hit, this first round will be devastating. We must assume that Tanks are taken first as casualties, so the next rounds are likely to be infantry fighting. And in that case, attacking infantry need matching artillery if they want to be hard hitting. And as always, artillery will be targeted in artillery duels, so in the latest rounds only infantry and aircrafts will survive. Just like in the real world.

Midnight Express,

Thanks for posting the stats. I have not play tested this idea as of yet. I got a new A&A player whom is mostly a “general gamer” I played spring '42 with him, and while he enjoyed the session winning as the Axis powers, I’m not sure he’s “all-in” as an A&A player or even (likes Risk!) a war-gamer.

I poised the question of whether or not he would purchase a game like A&A provided he would have ample opportunity to play it. His response, " This game would most likely sit on my shelf collecting dust." I was planning to offer him a copy of 1942SE un-opened FREE OF CHARGE as I have more than one, if he were inclined to make it a regular habit to play. Un-success…. no regular players.

If anyone decides to play this HR and post a report please do. I think this is a great idea with potential. I simply cannot get any form of regular group to dedicate any amount time beyond a very occasional game of A&A to participate.

Anyways thanks for the input folks.

Edit: I know several gamers that regularly play games of all stripes. The guy I mention in this post is a regular gamer with a large collection of games and a very nice person. However of the several gamers I know, every one of them enjoyed playing Axis & Allies but would not be interested in regular, scheduled gaming sessions of A&A.

I really like limiting the Hawaii IC to two units max build.  I can understand the US getting an IC on Hawaii, but I always thought it was ludicrous that it had unlimited build.
The India getting an extra infantry each turn can make it pretty hard for Japan to take India.  That’s an interesting rule that those free infantry can not be moved.  So basically, those are strictly for defense of India.  That might be an interesting rule to incorporate for all capitals, and even in other games as well.  Ever play a game of A&A and mistakenly left your captial undefended?  Now you would always at least have some infantry there.
I am wondering about Rule #6b.  Why would you not let Japan build more than 3 subs per turn?  I take it that applys ONLY to building new subs, right?  Japan is allowed to have more than three subs on the board, right?

I’m wanting to condense rules for AA50 Strategic down as much as possible
I do still like the idea of adding ONE unique Tech to each nation
Mass Aircraft and Heavy Transports are not really needed, game’s are generally shorter and these are less advantageous to research
Royal Air Force will also be eliminated as it’s use is limited in a shorter game
With only 1 starting BB, Yamatos has limited use and can also be eliminated (I’ve kept Air bases as a Global Tech (at reduced cost) for Naval defense vs. HB)

**RUSSIA

MOBILE INDUSTRY (Minor Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-Your ICs may move 1 territory during NCM (as long as you owned them at turn start). ICs can only move among Red territories. They may produce in territories they just moved to, as long as Russia owned the territory at turn start. Production in the new location is “Limited” to INF, RTL and ARM only, up to the territory limit.
-Multiple ICs may exist in a single territory, but only 1 remains active (for the purposes of Rocket attacks, SBR and unit production)

UNITED STATES

REINFORCED CARRIERS (Minor Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-Your ACs require 2 hits to destroy, just like BBs

UNITED KINGDOM

JOINT COMMAND: D-DAY (Minor Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-Once during the game, at the start of UK’s turn, you may declare a D-Day Invasion, a combined attack of UK and US forces which occurs on UKs turn. D-Day may only target France, and all attacking land and sea units MUST amphibious assault from SZ 7 (with the rare exception of land units already in Ger, NWEur, or Italy which can attack France as per regular rules). Air units may come in from any territory provided they have enough movement points.
-On the UK turn, you may command any US units in range of France.  These US units cannot be used on US’ next turn. US units can use UK transports and vice versa.
-The UK and US must agree on casualties, otherwise the defender chooses. AAGun fire is rolled separately against each nation. Techs still only apply to the units of the power that has them.**

5. Atomic Bomb  rolleyes Really? The atomic bomb was only used once the US had practically won the war. It might have been drawn out, but they would have won. This is already represented by VCs. Once you capture enough VCs, you win. This would happen before and atomic bomb was developed.
In regards to game play, it seems lame. The cost seems to be too much merely to prevent one turn of production. I honestly think the whole idea should be scrapped.

The war would have gone on till 1946. The two bombs dropped changed that. japan figured it could get a negotiated peace if it soiled the beaches of Japan with American blood. The bombs changed that completely. It was also dropped to get political advantage over the Soviets who wanted spoils in Asia and to deny them the same. The bomb was the most important invention of the war and it above all other techs must be represented. Obviously, it would be had to obtain and require alot of research to have. The idea is also to have one tech that changes the game and makes it end. Some games require such an outcome because players sometimes never surrender and Atomic weaponry will finish the stalemate.

And that is exactly what it did.

In some games you can play and not obtain an outcome, while with this technology you are assured that the game will finish up soon. In most games that last of normal duration it wont be developed and thats the charm of it.

Two Questions:

1)Adlertag is this you?

2)Are you from Norway too?