AA50 on Steroids!

@Panther

Thank you for taking the time to explain.

@barnee
Thank you very much
I appreciate.
Tasos

_Here’s a rule with two aims:

1. Safeguard Russian production (with some historical precedent) from relatively easy/early/immediate German poaching
2. More setup variety and more interesting potential play at the periphery of the map._
3. Enable/strengthen KJF and bilateral games.

The Rule:
During setup, do not automatically place any ICs in non-capital territories.  Instead, those ICs (and up to one AA unit/gun that accompanies it) may be placed in any territory controlled by their owner. The choice of where to place any starting ICs can be discussed openly, but should be made in secret and revealed simultaneously by all players.
Optional: If the UK does not start with at least one non-capital IC, allow it to place an IC+AA unit as well.

I think this works best with some of kind of mild incentive to encourage creative placements, so here are two versions of a bonus (pick one):

Bonus version A: Wherever a starting, non-capital IC is placed, permanently increase the IPC value of that territory by one (but not above 3).

Bonus version B: Whenever ANY non-capital IC is built or placed (for the duration of the game), permanently increase the IPC value of that territory by one (but not above 3).

Nice work thanks, the dropbox files are still available! I have downloaded them all, now I have to find a way to print these in a decent way. Any tips?

@General:

hi jen, thanks for the rules.  I have a few questions though.

How does rolling for research work now?  Do you just pick a tech and if you roll a 6 you get it?

Yes, technology works the same as it did in Revised, but with the 4:6 rule as in AARe.  It makes it a more cost effective choice since you’ll never end up with one you cannot use - especially helpful to Italy and Russia, but also to the other nations.

does Italy place their afrika corps every round?

No, it’s just like before.  You get the units on the round you get it.

Do you place 2 free infantry every turn for mech inf?  And what does 1. Borrowed from American National Advantage mean as the usa do not have this advantage

Again, it’s just the round you get it.  And yes, if something is “borrowed from” it means that it was a rule for that nation at one time that is now being applied to all nations to account for the advantage being turned into a technology from revised to anniversary.

The italian advantage ii. +5 IPC if Axis controls: Egypt, Jordan, Libya, Sudan, Italian Africa, Gibraltar, Balkans, Algeria/Morocco and no enemy SURFACE ships are in SZ 13, 14, 15 or 16. isnt this the same as the regular no ?  and where is Italian africa?

Italian East Africa is that spur sticking out into the Red Sea to the right of Egypt/Sudan. (It is directly south of Sudan on the map.)

No, it is not the same since Italy now needs more territories and the entire sea, instead of just three.  Also, France is not a requirement for Italy to have this NO.

Thanks :)

You’re welcome.

Wild Bill:

Yes, joint strike can be absolutely devastating to the axis forces if and when it occurs, but it is designed to be.  Furthermore, if the allies give up taking it, that means the axis could defend it with less and put more pressure on Russia.  It’s a game of weighing the odds and this is a strategic decision - do I force Italy/Germany to defend France early and give up Joint Strike, or do I let them move more towards Russia so I can have a joint strike later?  It’s all how you think your opponent will play, will he mass defenders to stop you, or will he ignore it in hopes you take it then mass defenders?

@bugoo:

As far as tech goes I would propose a point system.  Assign a point value to each tech.  Purchase researchers as normal.  Roll as normal for research, but add up the total rolls and apply them toward the selected tech.  You could assign different researches to different techs, but cannot change the tech they work on once purchased.  Once point value is reached, tech is gained said researchers are lost.  For example.

As US I want heavy bombers eventually, they are worth 30 research, so on turn 1 I purchase one heavy bomber researcher.  I roll and get a 3.  Now I need 27 more research to get heavy bombers.  On turn 2 I decide I want super subs, and since that tech isn’t as powerful I only need 15 research to get them.  I purchase 2 researchers, both for the subs as I want to sink japan’s navy now.  I roll a 2 for my heavy bomber researcher, leaving 25 left, and then roll a 4 and a 5 for my subs, leaving 6 left and with any luck on turn 3 i’ll get my super subs.

This will allow you to slowly work at a tech, rush for it, and choose to go for the good but expensive techs, or take an easier, faster, tech, or all of the above.  Now all nations may buy a heavy bomber researcher turn 1, but hey there is nothing wrong with that!

Hello.  I am digging up this as the tech lovers/haters discussions have started to heat up.

I re-read your thoughts and am wondering if you ever did anything more with this idea of a tech pointing system.  Did you ever come up with point targets for each tech?

The neat thing about this is that it can be easily tweaked with out re-writing the whole process.

Or you could go one step further and adjust the targets by country too.  For example, make super subs very low (read affordable) for Russian super subs or something like that, or even harder for the wealthy countries (like extra points for USA for Long Range)

yea i added in planes as attackers but if non transports are in the sea zone, they must attack as normal as per OOB.

Aircraft Carriers can be outfitted with technology to have AA Guns that fire just like ground based AA Guns.  Only one per sea zone may fire, but it may fire at each attacking enemy aircraft.

CV was a poor defender for anti-aircraft. They relied on CAP to intercept incoming planes at lower altitude to intercept these and drive them away from the fleet. The Carrier created an umbrella of air cover to protect in this manner. It could not stand up to much of a fight and was the weakest in terms of AA capabilities in WW2.

IN modern times this changed but not in ww2. At midway 3 Japanese carriers were sitting ducks because the air cover was lost fighting off waves of incoming torpedo-bombers, and the carriers had the best Japanese equipment money could buy and it didn’t mean a thing because they were unescorted by cruisers and enough supporting ships.

A BB was a slower moving ship and was meant not to engage fighters but to engage surface ships and having the slower speed could only hope to surprise the enemy from nowhere or fight on equal terms against other battleships. Cruisers were some of the fastest ships and much better suited to fight airplanes by escorting fast carriers that were vulnerable.

The only thing the BB should have is a first strike attack against other surface warships.

Cruisers should move 3 with carriers and have a AA gun at planes hitting at 1 on the first round.