Limits on Infantry Builds

@vodot Thanks! I made some edits to the original post based on our discussion. I hear you that it is important to avoid unreasonable “side-stepping” of blockades, but trying to count up fractional territories is way more bookkeeping work than I want to assign. Instead, I give players the choice of using either a land supply line or a sea supply line, but not both.

@general-spengler Very interesting. I think having conscripts cost only $1 and be totally unable to attack is both a little sleepy and tends to give too much of an advantage to the defenders.

What about conscripts that cost $2, move 1, defend at 1 each, and attack at 1 as a stack? In other words, no matter how many conscripts you have in an attack, they all collectively only roll one die per round of battle, which only hits if the die is a 1.

This should naturally discourage players from building too many conscripts, since a stack of 5 conscripts is less cost-efficient than a single conscript.

You could also limit production of conscripts to 1 per factory and/or recruiting center per round. So if you have both a factory and a recruiting center in the same territory, you could buy up to 2 conscripts there per turn. If you have only a factory or only a recruitment center, then you could only buy 1 conscript per turn in that territory.

If an airbase has more than 2 damage points would therefore be 3 or more which means it’s not functional at all.

I think 3 is too restrictive.

I would be ok with trying a house rule that requires:

1. Air Base is completely damage free for any extra movement range period.

2. 3 plane types could move an extra movement point; not unlimited… So, 3 bombers, 3 tacs, 3 fighters…ect.

Think of every tt with an IPC value as having an infantry “depot”. The limit raised per turn based on the IPC value is reasonable.

But in the long term (and I’m thinking in particular of WWI) the number of men of fighting age available in any area is limited. WWI would not have gone on indefinitely; each side would simply have run out of men. Furthermore, the more you try to recruit in a particular area, the quality of troops raised decreases, and resistance to conscription grows.

Also consider depots as infantry training centres; a unit recruited there receives basic training, say the equivalent of a 1-1 infantry unit.

Leave it there another turn and it improves to a 1-2 unit, or you might use the turn to train it as storm troopers, paratroopers etc. You have to decide on the value of properly trained units against the immediate need for troops at the front, even if they’re just raw recruits to soak up hits.

A further refinement is to indicate the nationality of a depot; some nationalities will fight for more than one side, for example Romanian units might be raised by Germany or Russia depending on who controls Bucharest.

Units starting the game can be assumed to be fully trained, those raised from scratch start as raw. You can even consider some casualties to be wounded, and needing to be sent back to the depots for recuperation.

Yea,  they are great replacements.  Snipers, or like you said, just a cool pose.

So when they get dropped in an area with 1 enemy infantry, how do they fight anybody?

Didn’t think of this happening. :| I guess you’d just have to have at least 1 defending unit fighting at any one time, regardless of the amount of paras.

Airborne can be considered “elite” troops however, but to mix them like this is not realistic.
Marines are special troops trained for sea invasions and are also “elite” but not in the same task as above.

I admit that realism is compromised here, but if elite infantry are allowed to fill all these roles, it will mean less unit types and therefore less compexity. Believe me when I say I’m still all for historical accuracy and realism, this is just my take on things.

remember the 4X rule in these places and also the variations on costs for infantry depending on VC.

1.  Is there a limit as to the number of infantry that can be built at VCs?

yes of course, the 4x rule…

2.  If China is incapable of replacing American aircraft or building armor, why are they given a factory in the game?  In reality, China had only the capability to build infantry - which was poorly trained and equipt.  The presence of a factory in the game allows for China to build any type of unit.

4x rule allows them to only build artillery or infantry ( or mech)

As infantry are built at victory cities, I propose removing the factory from China.

but what about artillery? China had artillery and they are but an army of misfits w/o them

Historically Inaccurate