Another bold concept for AARHE

I bumped this up because there is a similar thread to compare with.

Each power with a capital gets to place 1 piece of Infrastruture on the board each turn FOR FREE.

Whether that is railroads/centers, sea mines, land mines, fortifications, or otherwise, it’s at each power’s discretion. (Maybe nothing more than 8IPC value?)

For every 20 IPC’s made after that (Not capture), Said power gets an additional piece to place each turn for FREE.

The reason it’s for free, is quite simply, that alot of these infrastructure pieces might not see regular integration, unless you’re just going to get them anyways. It represents some of the more civilian input into the war effort.

If you couple this, with a map overlay, of where infrastructure should already be historically,  and with the Scars of War/Battle Damage package.  This could make things incredibly interesting.

Perhaps you could also choose to REPAIR damaged infrastructe (Not factories) during the purchase phase, instead of placing one of your new ones.

GAH!  I always forget the fine print about resorting to OOB/LHTR to clarify – thanks Tekkyy.

I love copy and paste  :-).

I am a big fan of Diplomacy, but can’t imagine adding simultanious movement to A&A. First, as Imperious Leader noted, there would be a large amount of moves to write. In Diplomacy a leader has to write at most 17 orders, but will generally need to issue 5-10. In Axis and Allies both the number and the complexity of the orders increases.
Second, writing down orders will likely serve as somewhat of a deterent to inivation. For example; as Germany I draft a set of orders to strike the U.S.S.R at Causcus and Karelia. If I suddenly see a stronger strategy that involves me completely changing my orders for both countries, the time I already put in that will be lost and the time I will need to write up new orders may deter me from attempting my new course of action. Having to continuously edit a page or two of orders will be tedious.
Third, in real life military leaders would re-act to enemy movements. If as Japan I ordered my units in Kwangtung, Manchuria, and French Indochina to attack China, but was attacked by units in Soviet Far East and India my attack would not proceed. Not only that, the Manchurian units would likely be diverted to re-inforce and/or counter-attack.

replace
“its income cannot be spent in other territories.
That income and only that income can be spent in its IC or VC during purchase units phase this turn.
That income is forfeited if not spent this turn.”

with
“The blockaded territory’s income can only be spent in its own VC or IC. Income from other territories may not be spent in the blockaded territory’s VC or IC.
If the blockade territory’s income is not spent this turn it is forfeited.”

when you feel happy with the infantry placement rules just tell me and I’ll paste them into the main document

I hope you’ll repost in table format though  :wink:

Ok I’ll make it more precise.

I am touching up the the player aids atm.

Ok let me clarify my thoughts on that… They wouldn’t necessarily have to pursue a historic goal, but rather go for completing a certain amount of techs (3 for example)…

GG