EXECUTIVE ORDER: if you add 1 rule you have to remove 2 other rules

Seems pretty good. Looks like a lot more money for the Allies. Might be required since the UK is so busted up. Seems like you’d always J1 given that the US is already making 5 bucks off Japan anyways.

This is what we do in game. Each neutral has a territory value and some kind of army and a few ships. You can attack them if you want. But u need to capture each neutral territory to get icp income.
If you lose battle then just that lone neutral joins other side.
But we also have a cost to try and influence a strict neutral to your side and you receive the territory value towards income and what is there for the ground troops and a possible ship. Nothing stronger than a Destroyer.
Not all countries can influence the same neutrals. We roll a d20 and a 4 or less u get neutral.
This is just an idea u may look at.
Spain and Turkey have the biggest Amy but cost more for those 2 to try and get.

@Argothair said in Alternate dice rules:

It’s a hard problem. …
If you let players use LL when they really care about the battle, and force them to roll regular dice the rest of the time, then that keeps the game moving at a reasonable speed without leaving you feeling like you lost the whole game because the dice went against you in one crucial battle.

Sure, if you save one of your precious 3 LL dice chips for that key battle, you might not have such remorse.

Also, what if the game goes 15 rounds? Is 3 really enough? Perhaps start with 3 and get an additional LL battle every 3rd round?

Allot comes down to a players level of comfort when allowing randomness into the game. Some players love the gamble, the long shot, the chance that we might still have a shot to win with some luck on our side in this last ditch effort.

Other players might become dismayed when the above scenario happens to them after all their well executed plans have them at a 99% chance of winning and feel that the dice has stolen their victory.

This is a grey area, there is no right or wrong when it comes to what is the proper level of randomness in a game of A&A?

@Imperious:

Unit on both sites are drawing board, partially developed, or fully developed naval and air units. The LZ-135 was never built, only drafted on paper and in this sense it was real.

A fair point, though it should be remembered that some on-the-drawing-board concepts are less real than others.  Germany’s proposed H-Class battleships began as realistic designs in 1938 or 1939, and one or two of them were actually laid down.  When the construction work was suspended, however, drawing-board work continued on-and-off until 1944.  The design kept getting upgraded, and kept getting more and more unrealistic; from about 1941 onward, these designs can be regarded as purely paper studies, with zero chance of being built and thus little need to keep practicalities into account.  But at least they were being designed by competent naval architects, in contrast with Hitler’s propensity for sketching battleship designs on the back of envelopes.  (This fondness was an odd one, in view of his land-warfare orientation, but wasn’t entirely out of character: he believed that he knew more about warfare than his professionally-trained generals, and he similarly felt that he could come up with better battleship designs than professional naval architects.)  Hitler once proposed building a battleship armed with 800mm guns of the Gustav / Dora railway artillery type; in a rare example of common sense winning over Hitler’s fondness for gigantism (as illustrated by the 188-tonne Maus tank), an admiral managed to talk him out of the idea by pointing out that no existing German harbour was large enough to accommodate a ship big enough to carry guns of that size.

Here are some of the rules I liked that are different:

Naval spotting - makes sense, maybe add +1 to spotting roll if sub or plane present.

Research - I’m assuming those are free rolls.

AAA - firing before each round.  At 5 planes seems a bit steep.

Cruiser (AA) - That’s a house rule I already use.  Makes them a little more useful.

Railroads - I’ve seen and used them, but with a limit to units moved.  But since your limiting it to 2 spaces.

Research Focus - A research tech for your research roll.  Brilliant!

Heavy transports - Another one in use.

Sonar - Interesting concept.

Not sure on the “Dodge” concept.  Thanks for the listing of your rules.

They can repair damage to exiting facilities; -1 damage per turn. But choose the discount or the repair per POW, not Both.

Liberation:
If the territory a POW is in is captured, you may place an infantry per POW in your Place New Units Area.

Thanks - was wondering if anyone was going to respond to my Elite infantry rules…

Yeah - think I’ll try out the battlemap option, I moved to a new city and - though I have found some other gamers, they aren’t into A&A as much as my old crew…

Recently I saw some Player Aid/Reference Charts made by Imperious Leader.

First of all the picture background are absolutely works of art.  Very nice indeed.

What intrigued me was the Order of Play.  The normal standard Order of Play is

1. USSR
2. Germany
3. UK
4. Japan
5. USA

The one on IL’s Players Aid is

1. USSR (Turn one only)
2. Germany & Japan
3. USSR, UK & US.

For those of you who have played with the latter.  What advantages & disadvantages with this order of play.  Also, how dramatically does it change the game?  Does it affect balance of play?

The most obvious one I see is that it can be more historically accurate by allowing the allies to do combined assaults.  However, I see this as more beneficial to the Allies than the Axis.