Well not a bad idea… in fact another rule to force the US player to spend a specific % of income on Europe/Pacific would be a good house rule… what do you think the % should be?
Having Italy would be great, because they can have those NA’s, plus some other goodies…
I have remade the board and it looks exactly like revised, except its double the size ( i can make it larger but thats overkill… )
I am inspired by it and intend to make what i call “revised axis and allies: expansion edition”
Including new units, modified setups, special rules for weather,Soviet-Jap non - agression pact (optional), plus neutrals and minor axis allies. I would like to get a hold of B. Andersson (game master) who is a specialist in this… I offer a copy of all the files to anybody at this forum who can help me accomplish this task: ( this includes the map --formated on PDF) you just take it to the printers… I will post my map very soon here so you can see I believe in quality in this purpose. So the offer stands as follows: anyone who helps me gets a copy of the project.
Historically give western US 1/3 of it.
For game balance give them 1/2 of course.
Most of the wartime effort went to KGF.
We should follow historical path. I have to check on the 1/3 figure, but it sounds correct.
Any ideas on Italy?
Japanese-Soviet pact?
Well the game box for A&A does say its 1942, and at that time Italy was still in the fight. It wasnt until the following year that Italy dropped themselves from the war because of the allied invasion of sicily, but by that time Germany rushed reinforcements to control all of the Italian peninsula. I wouldnt mind having Italy playing as a 6th nation in the game, but id need to color a whole set of pieces for someone to play.
Maybe you could make Germany North/East, and Italy/Germany Mediterranean. Sort of like the splitting the US idea.
Thinking to make things simple as follows:
no change in placements, however the pieces in “southern Europe”, “Lybia” and “Balkans” become Italian forces and that means Italy gets 10 IPC per turn. That would not create any play balance issues. Just need some NA’s for them.
How about: no need for an IC to place infantry. Simply place purchased infantry on any territory that Italy owns. That could account for the MASSIVE amount of units they had in Africa.
Can’t think of any others, but there should be one concerning the Mediterranean.
no change in placements, however the pieces in “southern Europe”, “Lybia” and “Balkans” become Italian forces and that means Italy gets 10 IPC per turn. That would not create any play balance issues. Just need some NA’s for them.
splitting up the german forces into either german or italian forces will cause both forces to be weaker than the old unified german force. true, these divided forces get 2 rounds of attacks per turn (1 for the germans and 1 for the italians) but these forces can’t attack together. since the bigger factor at work here is the ability to attack together, dividing the germans into germans or italians will weaken the axis.
to make adding italy work, you’re going to have to add a lot more german units in startup and pray that the 10 fewer ipcs germany will get a turn won’t haunt them down the road.
You bring up a good point… I think what should be done is to add 10 IP to Germany itself and give the Allies 10 IP per turn to divide as they wish to represent lend lease (with some rules). So in a sence neither are burdened by this idea. The only drawback is as you mentioned… namely the German player will have less forces to work with, but some coordination will be necessary for a few turns till those 10 IP give Germany back its breathing space allowing Italy to pursue an increasing number of independant operations… Do you agree?
i think the 10 ipc allocation idea is not necessary. besides, if the allies get to divide 10 ipcs amongst themselves then they will (and should) just give them all to russia.
how about this… give italy 14 ipcs to start (8 for italy, 4 for balkans, 1 for libya, 1 for algeria)
give germany more units to make up for the ones converted to italian and have them start with 36 ipcs (germany now worth 12, eastern europe worth 4, and add a new territory: “low countries” worth 4)
this makes the axis start with 80 ipcs (instead of 70) = 36 for germany + 14 for italy + 30 for japan
I know this is kind of off topic, but what about having China as your sixth player? or is your goal to have 3 players vs. 3 players?
3 axis and 3 allies… not 4 allies and 2 axis… even teams, plus Italy was a major player in the war, while China was basically fighting itself and the Japanese and had nothing but “people power” in way of a armed forces… Italy was fully developed with a functional airforce and navy. It “qualifies” to the game more than say China.
Heres a picture of the map: Note the colors from the printer are not correct. They look exactly like the board.
the map looks like the standard revised map. where are your modifications ? adding italy? it is a nice revised map though, maybe you should ask a moderator to put it in the “downloads” section.
The modifications are the rules changes… I figured that if people had to goto the printers to spend 75.00 on printing the map… they would want to have the “original” version… YES i have made another map with modifications adding italy and new items (real flags) and the 3 new Victory cities (sidney, Honalulu, and Stalingrad)Â and a 20 value to germany to the map… just email me and ill send you the file as well… I will contact some moderator so everybody can download it… dont worry…
i think the 10 ipc allocation idea is not necessary. besides, if the allies get to divide 10 ipcs amongst themselves then they will (and should) just give them all to russia.
how about this... give italy 14 ipcs to start (8 for italy, 4 for balkans, 1 for libya, 1 for algeria)
give germany more units to make up for the ones converted to italian and have them start with 36 ipcs (germany now worth 12, eastern europe worth 4, and add a new territory: "low countries" worth 4)
this makes the axis start with 80 ipcs (instead of 70) = 36 for germany + 14 for italy + 30 for japan
I guess i missed this post… This is certainly another way to go… but you havent addressed what the Allies get to conpensate… If you use my idea its quite simple, since we only change germany to 20, allow Italy to “have” the aformentioned units, while we give US that lend lease money and allow the axis to attack it… IT solves balance, and it also adds something in the way of naval tactics to the game, perhaps giving the german player some consideration to build more subs which they never do.
guess i missed this post… This is certainly another way to go… but you haven’t addressed what the Allies get to conpensate…
i thought adding italy was to add balance, both in terms of 3 vs. 3 and in increasing the odds of winning for the axis. adding italy to strengthen the axis while keeping the allies the same is in lieu of a bid, etc…
Still working on the varient.
Hate to revive a dead topic but I am curious in if anyone actually figured out how to add in Italy.
Yes basically the idea is this:
we combine Italy for the axis with a lend lease for the Allies.
Germany loses southern europe, lybia, and the balkans=10 IPC and all the units that start in this these territories.
To compensate germany who was at 40 IPC … Germany itself ( the territory) is increased by 10 IPC so now you have the axis with a net 10 increase…
to offset this against the allies… The allies ( actually USA) gets 10 more IPC per turn and it must go as aid to either UK or USSR. The USA player decides in advance each turn how much he will loan to each nation. The money is transported by transport at the rate that would be equal to what a transport can carry… thus the amount to loan would be from 3 to 8 IPC ( 2 infantry, one tank-one infantry, one artillery one infantry)
Lastly, Italy plays concurrent with the German player.
We have not worked out Victory conditions for an individual Italyian victory… but soon.
