This isn't really a "rule" but…

I have posted many ideas on house rules, some good, some not so. But, at a minimum, do this…

Setup: Add 1 GE CA in SZ26 - represents German presence in Indian Ocean. Setup: Add 1 GE AR in GEA - represents gun boats on Lake Tanganyika (can also add rule this unit cannot move). Setup: Change GE AR in SWA to IN. Setup: Add 1 GE IN in KAM. Setup: Add 1 FR IN in FEA. Setup: Add 1 GE SS in SZ18 - represents German presence in Mediterranean. Setup: Change 1 OE CA to TR in SZ20. Setup: Change 1 RU CA to SS in SZ21. Setup: Change UK TR to SS in SZ2. Switzerland is impassable. Mobilization territories: Following can mobilize max of 2 x IPC value, plus restrictions. Bombay: Min. build 1 unit; Cannot build ships or tanks. Munich: Infantry, artillery only. Ottawa: Min. build 1 unit; Cannot build warships. Tatarstan: Infantry, artillery only. Marseilles: No restrictions. Mines vs. Transports: Allow mine hits to absorbed by loss of a load.

Thanks, we might give it a go not to change anything.

Off topic: I’ve thought about Europe 1940, but it’s so many rules and exceptions. I’d rather underwhelm than overwhelm them  :-) If they like Spring '42, they can always ‘upgrade’ to Global/Europe 1940 later on. If they think Spring 42 is too complicated, then the game series just isn’t for them. If they think it’s too simple, I can spring my Global-1940-monstersized-board-trap  :lol: I just want them to have a good time, get used to the flow of the game and see what happens.

YG,

Could you please share with the community the Axis vs Allies win ratio when using your House Rules from your group? Obviously group dynamics effects game play, outcomes, and strategies. Currently on triplea live, it seems the allies are winning more lately and only with a small bid (being used against Japan now or no bid at all).

J1 attacks are failing more often now. And when doing a J1 attack, I’m more prevalent to stack FIC instead of concurrently hitting Yunnan. I run out of fodder too quick. I think the game has now gone full circle. Perhaps I’m way off? Anyways, the allies just shove everything. Japan may win a battle in one spot but they get overrun in the others.

My next table top G40 game won’t be until the 1st weekend of October (I’m jealous of you guys that have a G40 table top group). Â

Ichabod

Oh cool, we’re back! For a few days there I wasn’t able to get the site up.

I like the idea of a round 0 build up, but I think the implementation needs more work.

The first issue I’m anticipating is just sheer amount of time it would take to go around the table piece for piece. Beyond that you also have the issue of players matching each other (out in the open) by choosing to place all their TUV in just a few hot spots, at the expense of everywhere else. And finally, without any limits or caps for individual territories or sea zones you will likely see a ton of front line units, placed just outside the range of any opening attacks.

My suggestion would be to have more structure to the zero round, more rules defining where the units can be placed, or perhaps some kind of initiative role to determine the sequence in which they are placed.

One approach might be to just scale back the number of units or ipcs that are included in this process. So instead of taking all the starting TUV and putting that in a tray, you might just use a portion of the total, or perhaps instead allow players to add some smaller amount of TUV on top of the normal starting totals. Not only would that make things faster, it would also provide some much needed structure to the set up process.

Particularly with sea zones, instead of a race to be the first to occupy the contested ones (that border multiple originally controlled territories), you could restrict where naval units can be added to just those sea zones that already have a ship etc. Same deal with land.

You might make it a secret placement only revealed after everyone has recorded all their placements. Or you could break it down by unit type, first bases then inf then tanks then fighters then ships etc.

For ease of use, the more this zero round looked like a bid the easier it would be to implement. Although in this case it would be like a bid for all sides.

Again I like the idea a lot, I just think it needs more polish.

Hi guys, I was wondering if someone could give me some insight into changing some stuff in triple A. I am wanting to make a 2 turn game where all the axis can move at once then all of Allies.(UK being one economy). Also changing a few of the PU placements etc.

Cheers, TDS

Good implications for Battle of Britain etc.  At $10 it would basically take hits from 3 tactical or 2 strategic bombers to destroy a base (after AA).  The best part is it could kill some very gamey phoney baloney moves involving gratuitous bases.  For example:

J1 Japan takes Chahar
J2 Japan builds airbase in Chahar and lands bombers there
UK2 UK pacific bombs Chahar airbase
USSR3 Russia bombs it a second time, destroying it
J3 no Japanese SBR of Moscow

@The:

In AAR you couldn’t attack neutrals

Yes, and there’s a good reason for that. There’s no simple way to do the neutral situation without it being abused, so the OOB version tends towards making attacking true neutrals a rare option

dakgoalie38:

check out this section of what we came up with on paratroopers and air transport.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=7594.30