Axis and Allies Revised Varient ( historical edition)

Ok, here’s the “Light” version, some ideas in any case;

Dogfights: one round before SBR and land & naval combat, if defending fighter(s) choose to intercept. Fighters fire at ‘2’ and bombers at ‘1’. The max number of fighters that may intercept is the number of enemy aircraft. The first loss in dogfights is chosen first by defender as usual, but the next by the attacker, and so forth. This is to force bomber losses.

AA: divided into fixed and field AA, fixed AA are the normal pieces and fire at every incoming bomber in SBR raids only. But in normal land combat only Artillery units may fire, each fire on a ‘1’ on one aircraft taking part in the land combat up to a maximum of one roll per aircraft. All AA hits cause the hit air unit to abort and return to base without taking part in combat or SBR.

CAP: in your turn, you may in your Combat Movement put fighters on Combat Air Patrol in an adjacent controlled land area or sea area without enemy units. Place CAP fighters on the border between areas to show they haven’t moved there. CAP fighters takes part in any dogfight combat(s) in enemy turns in the area, but may not take part in land or naval combat. At the start of your turn, all fighters on CAP land in that area or any adjacent area and then move as normal in Combat movement. They are not destroyed if the enemy captures the area, but if they have no adjacent area to land in in your next player turn they are.

SBR specials: UK may choose to conduct night bombing, bombers then can’t hit in dogfight combat and fighters hit only on a ‘1’. US fighters increase their range to ‘6’ when escorting bombers that SBR.

I agree, the simpler the better. How about these changes:

1. When determining the range for fighter movement, the combat itself counts as 1 move. (Alternatively, the rule can be stated that fighters moving in the combat move phase must automatically subtract 1 movement space.) For example, if a fighter starts in W. Europe and the player wants it to conduct combat in E. Europe, then the fighter moves the 2 spaces to E. Europe add 1 more for the actual combat, and then the fighter can only move 1 more (not 2) in the non-combat move phase. This is a very simple rule that I think accomplishes a lot. Fighters can still move from US to UK and from UK to Russia (only in non-combat), but fighters in W. Europe can’t attack naval units in SZ 8 and return to W. Europe.Â

2. Any fighter that started its turn on an aircraft carrier must finish its turn on an aircraft carrier, unless either the fighter or carrier is destroyed in combat. This rule is to make it so we still only need 1 type of fighter for every nation, but player’s aren’t using carrier and land based fighters as interchangeably. Since I like the idea of giving players some sneaky options I think we should keep it that a fighter on a carrier can land on another carrier without the first carrier needed to be taken as a casualty. I made the rule about fighters on destroyed carriers being able to land in territories because I also think that fighters should be able to land on a neighboring island if the carrier is hit so you don’t necessarily have 3 casualties for 1 hit on a carrier.

Hey Imp, did you ever get to play out a game with the victory city/infantry placement rules??

Geez, why cant you guys just play by the out-of-the-box rules ?

I’m thinking we should hold off on adding interceptors/escorts until phase 2. What do you guys think? I know eventually having them is important for realism but I don’t think we absolutely need them for phase 1 as long as we reduce the probability of AA hits to about 1/10, like Imp said.

I definitely agree. I didn’t mean to imply that we shouldn’t discuss interceptors/escorts, just asking if we should hold off introducing them until phase 2. All ideas are always open for discussion.

Great house rules Duke and Imp…

Maybe a little complicated for a non-hardcore WWII fanatic but still, these rules are way better than standard AA rules.

I have a simple suggestion for you: How about introducing the possibility of invading neutral countries?

Oh, and in the Blitzkrieg national advantage for the germans, when a fighter attacks with a tank, do both units attack on 4 or less?

GG

Keeping the ideas simple is in the forefront in terms of importance. The latter phases of our modifications will get slightly more complex, but only because they need to for us to do what we want to do with them. If you have any more new ideas or ideas on how to simplify what’s already been said, we’d appreciate the help.

IMO, the option of invading a neutral territory is a must, but since it’s not absolutely needed to have a good game we’ll probably end up incorporating it in phase 2. I never liked the 3 IPC penalty in the original game. I was always fond of the idea of the nearest opponent automatically placing free units of his to defend it.

Hey Imp, did you ever get down to analyzing those sub combat rules I posted? I’m looking forward to your feedback.

You guys have thought about approaching Avalon Hill to make your rules an official expansion set for Revised? I mean, it would be quit useful to buy all the kit (Rulebook, Tiger tanks, cruisers, halftrack etc…) in a single buy… Moreover, the units would be butiful and ACCURATE! :-D

That’s great. I can hardly wait to play with the new rules. Though a little more complex than the box rules, they put so much more realism in the game that it’s definitely worth a shot. Just the sub detection roll is a superb idea, how come nobody thought about it earlier? what about SS panzers, the new national advantages and new units like the cruisers?

I understand that you want to make this a gift to every AA fan in the world and I salute your intentions. But don’t you think it would be easier for everyone to buy your expansion as an official Avalon Hill expansion pack?

Why?

Let’s say I want Halftracks, Russian Shock troops, SS panzers, Cruisers, Heavy artillery scale units…Where do I get them?

As a customer, I dont care paying 20 bucks to buy such a great expansion pack with a new bigger map instead of passing countless hours on the web trying to find scale pieces suitable for the game…

OK, here I go…. how about these possible rules for commerce raiding:

During every player’s collect income phase, the player counts up all the IPCs under his control (just like before), but before he actually collects the IPCs each opponent first gets to conduct commerce raiding to reduce that IPC count (Remember that collect income phase occurs before combat move phase).

When commerce raiding is performed: Commerce raiding is performed during any given player’s collect income phase when either an enemy naval unit is located in a SZ bordering an IC owned by that player and/or when an enemy fighter is located in a territory which borders one of those SZs. Enemy fighters located on a CV are considered naval units in that SZ. Enemy fighters located on a territory bordering more than one SZ which borders an enemy IC can only conduct commerce raiding on 1 of the SZs (the owner of the fighter chooses which SZ). An example of this is German fighters in W. Europe raiding either SZ 6 or 7.

How commerce raiding is performed: Every enemy naval unit/ fighter satisfying the above qualifications rolls a die to determine the number of IPCs that the opponent must surrender back to the bank. The number of IPCs surrendered is equal to the number rolled, however, units only do damage on rolls that would be considered a hit during combat when they are the attacking. For example, BBs will only do 1-4 IPCs of damage when they roll that respective number. Fighters will only do 1-3 IPCs of damage when they roll that respective number. Submarines conducting commerce raiding roll 3 dice instead of just 1.

Limits on commerce raiding: Only 1 roll from a surface naval unit/ fighter (either CV or land based) per SZ per turn may be counted when calculating the reduced number of IPCs. The 1 roll that is used is the roll that does the greatest amount of damage. (This rule is used to encourage players not to clump all surface units/ fighters in only 1 SZ bordering an enemy IC).

Notice that submarines, in addition to rolling 3 dice each instead of just 1, also aren’t grouped into the same limitation above because they aren’t surface naval units. Instead, only the best 3 rolls from subs may be counted per SZ per turn. This means that the total IPCs surrendered per SZ is the sum of 4 Numbers… the single best roll from surface/fighter units and the 3 best rolls from sub/s.

Maximum loss for commerce raiding: The maximum number of IPCs that can be surrendered to the bank during commerce raiding for each IC is equal to the maximum amount of IPC output of the IC less the number of ‘connected IPCs’ to that IC. More than 1 IC may be raided during the same collect income phase.

The maximum amount of IPC output of an IC is either 4 times the IPC value of that territory or the total number of IPCs collected by that nation for that turn, whichever is smaller.

Remember the definition of a connected territory, pertaining to infantry placement limits? Same definition here. A territory is connected only when there is a continuous line of friendly territories separating the territories of interest.

Here are a couple of examples: Let’s say UK counts up 30 IPCs before raiding. The maximum that can be raided from UK territory is 30 (since 30 is less than 4 times the IPC value of 8 ) minus 8 (since no other territories are connected to the island of UK). This is 30-8=22.

Now let’s do E. Canada with UK cashing out at 30 again. 12 (just 4*3) - 4 (E. Canada is connected to W. Canada 3+1=4… don’t count up US territory IPCs when calculating total connected IPCs for UK). 12 - 4 = 8.

Now India (still cashed out at 30) and only UK territory taken so far is Egypt. 12 - 5 (3 for India + 1 for Persia + 1 for Trans-Jordan)= 7.

You get the point. That’s all the rules to it. It’s not that much considering all the realism it incorporates into it. In case you’re wondering why the equation (total IPC output from IC) - (total connected IPCs) = (total amount that can be commerce raided) here’s the reasoning:

(total IPC output from IC):
Remember from IC purchase limitations per turn that no more than 4 times the IPC value of the territory may be placed at an IC per turn. This is where the first term comes from. Also, since no one can spend more IPCs than they have, I included the part about “or the total IPC count for the nation”.

(total connected IPCs):
The more the nation is connected to other friendly nations the less it is dependent on naval shipping to bring in supplies. This makes it so commerce raiding is more effective against the island of UK or Japan and less effective against Russia and Germany.

That’s great. I can hardly wait to play with the new rules. Though a little more complex than the box rules, they put so much more realism in the game that it’s definitely worth a shot. Just the sub detection roll is a superb idea, how come nobody thought about it earlier? what about SS panzers, the new national advantages and new units like the cruisers?

I’m really excited about these new rules. After running all my calculations on how these rules play out with the rest of the out of box rules I can’t see any problems that commonly creep up with many other house rules out there. I can’t see how this won’t be a smash-hit, unless people don’t even give it a chance because it might be so much at first to absorb. That’s why we really need these phases. If we put all the rules in 1 batch, it would be too long and no one would start using them. I’m sure after the 1st phase of rules people will be thirsty for more. It may take some time to spread the word out though.

My major concern right now is simplifying the way the rules are presented. I think I can make them appear simpler without actually changing the rules around that much.

Let me know what you guys think of the commerce raiding rules. When we feel like we’re done with those, we can move onto some slight tech changes and then hopefully do some serious playtesting.

If we find that the Axis are too powerful, I have a pretty good lend-lease rule to add…. US automatically gets 10 extra IPCs a turn but the catch is that they have to allocate it out to UK/Russia to be used on their next turns and it can be commerce raided as well.

If instead, we find that Allies are too powerful, then we can make commerce raiding even more powerful than it already is.