Balanced setup modification aav5 1942 2nd edition

Here are national objectives for the Anniversary 1942 scenario. These are for balance and to add some income.

Allies

United States
(5 IPC) Allies control Central US, Eastern US, and Western US
(3 IPC) Allies control Hawaii and Midway
(3 IPC) Allies control France or Philippines

United Kingdom
(3 IPC) Allies control India
(3 IPC) Allies control Australia and Solomon Islands
(3 IPC) Allies control France

Soviet Union
(3 IPC) Allies control Belorussia and Eastern Ukraine
(3 IPC) Allies control Karelia

Axis

Germany
(5 IPC) Axis control France, East Poland, and Ukraine
(3 IPC) Axis control Karelia
(3 IPC) Axis control Caucasus

Japan
(3 IPC) Axis control Manchuria and French Indo-China
(3 IPC) Axis control India
(3 IPC) Axis control Okinawa and Caroline Islands

Italy
(3 IPC) Axis control Morocco Algeria and Libya
(3 IPC) Axis control Egypt and Trans-Jordan

@Imperious-Leader
Hi IL,
I can see that some TTy in Siberia did not worth a real boost in economy.

Your suggestion made me think about a way to expand my first idea a little bit more, even if it is not truly accurate/realistic from a geo-economic POV.

When invading a Zero IPC island TTy with an amphibious assault, if winning get 2 IPCs.
If defending side won the battle, he get 1 IPC.

If it is a Zero IPC continental TTy, the invader gain 1 IPC.

It remains a bonus given through the result of a combat. No additional economic value to keep such islands on subsequent rounds.

That way, it is an incentive to fight over these TTys nonetheless.

Anyone playing anniversary with modern rules and/or units from 1942.2 or G40??
Any tips for balancing the game and/or changing the initial setup??

I’m excited to see the game being re-released but I like the modern rules for AA guns and tanks too much to go back I think, and I’m sure adding the units from G40 would be cool too.

Updated.

@General-6-Stars would you mind to share it with me as well. Thanks a lot

Here’s how I would do it:

Don’t think of the new power as just “Italy.” Instead, think of the new power as “all minor Axis powers.” The starting territories would be Italy, Southern Europe, Algeria, Libya, Rumania/Bulgaria, Finland, French Indo-China Thailand, and Argentina (!). You can actually leave the starting unit setup as is – that will give the new player 2 fighters, a battleship, and a transport to start with, while still leaving Germany and Japan with a bomber and five fighters each.

Open the Turkish Straits.

Put Italy first in the turn order, e.g., Italy - Russia - Germany - UK - Japan - USA. This is OK because Italy’s not really in position to mess up the Russian starting units too badly.

Leave Italy at 3 IPCs, and create a new 2 IPC territory out of neutral “Peru Argentina” that starts out empty, under Italian control, just as Brazil starts out empty and under American control. This will give Italy 14 IPCs at the start of the game – enough to buy a carrier, or a fighter, or a bomber, or a cruiser.

It’s OK that Italy has only three production slots, because Italy’s going to want to drop some expensive air/sea units. For example, if on turn one Italy builds 3 infantry and saves 5 IPCs, then on the next turn Italy might have as much as 22 IPCs to spend – which is really easy to do; you could buy a fighter and a bomber, or a transport, a destroyer, and a tank. Having only three production slots doesn’t really cripple the Italian player, and it wouldn’t be realistic anyway for Italy to crank out enormous armies of infantry; Italy’s population just wasn’t that large. If you really want to, you can probably build an Italian factory on turn 2 in Rumania.

@Baron:

Do you think this last HR makes Carriers too much vulnerable against Subs if they put 1 Fg and 1 TcB on board?

Does this cutting in half the defensive power of Carriers against Subs should be balance by a no restriction against Subs for Tactical Bombers?

TcB A3-4D4M4C10 can hit Subs anytime by themselves. No need of Destroyers.

But StB units (any number) can only hit submarine units when paired to at least 1 destroyer unit.

Who knows? Some ideas to judge this situation?

Don’t you think it could help simplify the Rules on the subs vs aircrafts?

Because, there is only StBs needing DDs on offence which can be part of any naval combat with Subs ?

Actually, this line of thinking pushed me further away.

Once fighters can no more hit any Subs, I thought why not simply allows both TcB and StB to hit subs without the need of destroyers.
But, at the same time, keeping all the actual stuff on DD and subs.
That would meant that any type of bombers attacking subs only in a given SZ should not be able to do any harm to them since subs keep their Surprise phase and can submerge prior to the regular combat phase. In other terms, DDs will still be needed on many circumstances to get a chance to hit subs.

So with Fg unable to hit them and the Subs submerge still very efficient, giving Bombers the ability to hit subs will not doom them.

That’s how I see things, am I under a false impression?
Do you think it is playable?
Because, it could be much simpler to play subs vs planes than the actual OOB.
Hope you can leave a comment.
Thanks.

also beware that this file doesnt understand the concept of original ownership.
If Germany captures Tobruk it should revert to Italian control, not become German.

Id really like to know if there is a way to fix this outside of edit mode.