Oil Rules

I think a good idea for 1914 would be to require at least 1 infantry to be stationed in every territory by the end of a power’s turn (the infantry must be from the power controlling. If they don’t, they won’t get the IPCs from this territory. Not only does it potentially make the game more historically accurate (to symbolize the need to keep civilian populations under control during wartime), but it probably also makes the game more balanced, as the Allies will probably be more burdened with this (since they have substantially larger colonial possessions).

I believe this thread below may provides some additional ideas and concept such as “double dipping”.
So I bumped it to reactive this TT income bonus thread.
Territory Income Bonus: for Classic, Revised, 1941/42.2 etc
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31978.msg1190315#msg1190315

Good point in the last paragraph, a turn does encompass multiple months and you would expect some sort of naval engagement if both forces were conducting active operations and not sitting in home port. Adding a dice roll to determine if a naval battle occurs adds too many variables for the moment. But I’d certainly like to add a retreating rule in my next home game. I think this would create a much more aggressive game if the risk of losing your entire fleet on one bad round of dice was limited.

Does anyone have any experience with this? How did you do it? What did you do with transports? etc.

Gotcha, thank you.  :-)

@dijitz

Well, I may be mistaken, but it seems mathematically that when there’s already a nearly triple-percentage advantage in Allied economic power, extending that further only serves to deepen the advantage.

To illustrate, lets say in a battle you have 3 tanks and I have 1, a 3:1 ratio. I like your chances even better at 6:2 and 9:3, etc.

Let me clarify my reasoning on point number 2:

Submarines defend at a zero because they are not firing back, they are battening the hatches, flooding the ballast tanks and adjusting the dive planes hoping to get below depth charge depth before being sunk. (Which is silly, I guess you should say destroyed not sunk, since they sink on purpose…)

Meanwhile, they attack at three because they quietly slip into range, hide in the waves, line up their shot just right and fire.  Since there is resistance to giving them called shot abilities (where they tell us who they aim for before firing, like Kaitens and Kamikazees did in AARe) I figure this is a solution that would work.

Also, it should be mentioned that I am assuming Super Submarines has been changed to Super Destroyers which would increase Destroyer Attack Power = to Submarine Power.

Submarines do not defend with a surface fleet, they travel solo usually way out ahead as scouts or raiding enemy shipping.  Treat them like transports if they are detected and defenseless.

Thats right. To me, the multiple collect income causes inflation.
Yes collecting income before combat does stop this.

Regarding the essay on a pad that can be reduced. For example in AARHE the Axis/Allies sequence makes. Its not 4 turns between Russia 1 and Russia 2. So you don’t have to hire an accountant to keep track of things even if we collect income before combat.

@Imperious:

heres some manageable rules to use:

I most like the part about destroyer and crusier negate submarine’s preemptive fire on a 1-to-1 basis (rather than unlimited in AAR).

Simple enough to implement for even first time players. Yet quite effective in improving gameplay dynamics.