AARHE: Phase 3: Revised NA's

Hey Young Grasshopper,

Can you say a few words about why you’re writing these house rules, who they’re for, or what you hope to accomplish with them? Hard to offer comments in a vacuum.

Because there are no neutral victory cities in Anniversary, I’m not sure your VP system changes anything beyond just counting up each victory city as one point. Any time I take a city, that means you lost a city, and vice versa. Normally, when I take a city, I gain +1 VP and you lose -1 VP, so the total VP swing per city is 2 points. Under your system, when I take a city, I gain +2 VP and you lose -1 VP, so the total VP swing per city is 3 points.

That’s it – you’re changing the swing from 2 points to 3 points, but it’s not like you can conquer half a victory city, so it really doesn’t matter if the swing per victory city is 2 points or 3 points or 50 points. I’m pretty sure it all works out the same in the end. No? I imagine you’re trying to reward players for being aggressive/proactive, but I don’t think your rule actually accomplishes that.

Also, to echo Baron Munchhausen’s concern, I don’t like the idea of allowing intercepts against bombers that only deal 1d6 damage, because then it virtually never makes sense to launch a bombing raid. It really doesn’t pay to launch more than 2 bombers against the same factory (you wind up wasting some of their power because the damage gets maxed out, but you still risk losing them to flak). So if I can defend my home factory with 2 or more fighters (really not that hard) then there is no point in bombing anything – between the 2 pips on the fighter and the 1 pip on the AAA gun, you have almost a 50% chance of losing your bomber on each run. 50% chance of dealing 3.5 damage vs. 50% chance of losing a 12 IPC bomber is a terrible trade-off. Sure, you could escort your bomber with fighters – but nobody in Anniversary has that kind of air power to spare. If you can spare 4 planes for a mediocre bombing raid, you should be using them to take territories. Just my two cents. If you’re going to import the interceptor rules, I’d like to see some kind of buff to the bombers.

Is there any feedback on playing this set up/turn order/NO’s?

France goes first with more units & aircraft carrier

Italy starts out neutral

US navy with 4 aircraft carriers to start

Just to name a few changes that seem big to me.  The victory conditions listed & different NO from the original I have used before and found them to enhance the game play.

Hopefully, I can get this set up/rules in place and we can try it out soon.  Just curious in the meantime what others have discovered from their experience.

Typing from a smartphone is the best way to respond LOL! So sorry for the typos and grammar.

Anyways Hotspurs. I really encourage you and others to play around with the game.

Maybe a morale tracker for Alliances instead of Powers.

When Capitals worth 12 IPCs together were captured, the alliance that lost these capitals has to give up fighting.

@empireman:

did they go after UK? or after another country?

At the beginning of the game I bought a sub and another destroyer and went on a submarine hunt.
Then they helped reinforcing the british after being liberated by the USA. They captured Brasil and Invaded gibraltar and North-Africa alongside the Americans. In the end they were able to invade Norway. The allies claimed victory shorty after that. I found them fun to play with.

I’m thinking of just putting them in as a complete independent force from the beginning starting with the 7 IPC’s from Canada.

Either way they were an original addition to our game without interfering with balance issues. I gave them a spot going behind the UK but maybe it’s better for them to go behind Italy’s turn. That’s something I still have to tweek :)

@Cmdr:

@Gargantua:

Paratroopers talk a big game…

But for examle, if Patton hadn’t have broken through to Bastogne,  they would have been massacred :S

I still think it is a bit complicated.

Just have a rule that says you have a full round, from the time you are cut off, to establish a line of supply (unbroken, but you can make it as conveluted as you need to establish it) to a friendly industrial complex or all units in the territory are lost.  It must be a major industrial complex or convoy zone (free of enemy warships.)  That stops you from building a minor complex to supply your troops and stops the enemy from just taking a major complex and cutting off your entire continent since you can get to a convoy zone instead.

Maybe I think too simply?  It just seems the easier it is to understand, the better the chances of using it and spreading the idea to others.

I prefer the notion of keeping it simple.  My A&A “house rules” games have so many rules as it is…

ok always on then.

ok