Realism house rule

@armedace
Those are some pretty cool ideas, I’ve thought about incorporating marines and how to do so-your ideas seem good. I also like the idea of interceptors at 2, more realistic and makes you think about SBR more. Although I’m not so sure about reducing air bases costs and increasing their ability to scramble to nearby land-seems OP.

@TheAandAClassicDude:

Germany: The Waffen SS: Costs 4 IPCs. Attacks and Defends on 2 or less. Moves 1 (Use Germany�s Infantry pieces from Axis and Allies Classic to represent them.)

Could we leave out the Nazi unit? The last thing I want are people falsely thinking this is game and website is some kind of alt right meeting place.

Besides, Germany doesn’t need any HRs help when they can churn out 5 IPC tanks.

There’s no official answer that I know of.  A&A is such an abstracted game that, in one sense, it would be meaningless to say that game unit X corresponds to real-world military (or naval) formation Y.  Given the scope of A&A Global 1940, however, the various unit types on the map would roughly correspond to large formations if we were to assume that the allocation of units in the rules corresponds to real WWII numbers.  As an example, Germany’s invasion of the USSR was carried out with over 150 divisions – so from that perspective, the small number of sculpts on the actual board could at best only correspond to army groups.  At that level, it shouldn’t even be possible to differentiate between the components of the army groups, nor even of their consitutent armies or corps; the highest-level tank formations in WWII were, I think, armoured divisions and (one level further down) tank brigades.  So one way to look at the game would be to imagine that we’re not actually seeing the military formations themselves, but rather a patchwork picture showing some of the elements of those formations, with some of these elements being high-level ones and others being lower-level ones (like tank brigades).

@Baron:

Hope UK Pacific new turn order will help smooth the game flow.
Do you intend to merge it with ANZAC when you have less players around the table?

I don’t think so, the group loves the speed of the game with the separate UK nations… but they want something a little closer to oob rules. Also, it’s believed that the new victory objectives help balance the game the way a combined UK Pacific and ANZAC combo once did. It still needs a few tweeks to the NOs.

I added various links and made some changes to the first three parts of the rules, technology, and units.

@lnmajor:

how about this?
place a roundel under a sub on the board to signify its submerged. it can only move 1 space per turn submerged. you must use ASW search roll of 1-2 to detect sub from destroyer or cruiser. surfaced sub can move 2 spaces per turn. ASW roll is 1-4 when sub is surfaced. now, on second turn, if sub remains submerged put second roundel under sub. beggining of 3rd turn submerged sub must surface for 1 turn no matter where it is. even if it has to surface strait into hostile ships and be attacked.

not a bad idea. The one benefit to having them off the board is the surprise factor.

Great ideas though…

@WILD:

So as the defender you bring in 2 reinf 2nd wave. The attacker doesn’t like the odds and has no eligible units to reinf so he retreats. The defender would then have to pull his 2 reinf units back and they would be idle for 1 complete round? Sounds like a good bluff and you might hold on to the country. Keeping track of idle units might be hard, because you could end up with several nations with idle units causing some confusion. Don’t get me wrong I like the idea of the defender having options for reinforcements or retreat. I think its silly to think the defender would just sit there and let the enemy dictate the battle with out using all his resources. Maybe someone else will chime in with an idea or two.

yeah hopefuly

@Grigoriy:

I’d go with Audie Murphy: attacks at 3 as long as he’s in Africa or Italy. :)

make that Harrison Ford… :lol: