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

@KraytKing said in Operational Realism House Rules:

I am playtesting this week for the first time, I will write up a comprehensive and detailed AAR. I suspect it will be illuminating.

Awesome :)

Issue is that if you’re going for historical set up, you need three access points of Lend Lease for USSR with Far East being the least amount and taking in only non combat equipment which I know is impossible to do for AnA so I say the Lend Lease point has to generate income no larger than 2.

Technically USSR was only moving factories and that was because it was easy to use farming factories to produce tanks, go figure.

@Imperious:

Ok here is the gist of it… you want a unit that can “target” another unit for removal? This is the domain of either armor units ( tank destroyers, SPA, or even heavy artillery)

Infantry would only have it in terms of a commando or special forces unit that goes in and takes out an installation or special tech unit. Use my rule for SPA or allow a unit like a commando unit to choose what it hits if it rolls a one.

Forgot to mention this will be in my D12 games so the hit on a 1 will work.
Elite Guard Inf, SS Inf, Bravo Inf or Black Shirt Inf, Veteran Inf, Commando, and a Marine, A3FR A2 D4 M1 C4 A roll of a 1 can pick target first round only. Can build 1 per turn only.

I think 2 a turn may be to strong. I can put a token under a inf piece or stack showing how many get the special shot if you can build 2 a turn but only 1 gets the special shot.

@UltimateChaos:

Yea you are correct. I guess POWs would never really work in this game because unlike real war it does not matter how many men you lose

I’m not convinced the idea couldn’t work, only that the current idea of it wouldn’t work.

How about a situation where, for every 3-5 infantry you kill, you gain a PoW that can be placed anywhere. PoWs need to be protected from liberation and every PoW in a province over it’s IPC value costs you 1 IPC/turn in support.

Results:
You don’t muck with the balance around attack/counter attack and amphibious assaults.
You’ve got incentive to distribute the PoWs you capture and risk their liberation, rather than stock them in your capital.
The Axis, generally considered the stronger side, will take brunt of the downsides since they are killing large numbers of Russian and Chinese infantry. Might actually balance the game.

The whole problem lies on Japan’s absurd overpowerness. No matter what house rules are present, Japan will always take Soviet far east and China. Allies have nothing to prevent it.

Why Japan’s role is always trying to rescue Germany via marching to Moscow? Why Japan always outproduce Germany and USA? It is neither fun, nor historical plus it totally deprives Pacific front and two ocean going approaches for USA.

Typically USA esablish a pipelines in North Africa while abandons Pacific, Britain in N.Russia, Germany turning into surviving mod waiting Japan to recue. I’m really sick of to see the same thing.

The solution is make Germany 2 times stronger than Japan considering 1942 borders, make Soviet far eastern and Chinese territories less valuable (Making two territory worth 1 with Nos), Hawaii factory with 2ipc value, then rebalancing.

interesting might give this a try

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.

Naw its a small point… let it stay how it is… I guess its a balance issue vs. Historical thing and a minor one at that.