PLay test rules mordern axis and allies

@skhande2

I my view, tanks, artillery, and infantry units don’t just represent those things, but rather their units. Most tank, artillery, and infantry units during World War 2 contained some organic AA guns. While there are obviously differences in the size of divisions between the powers (Soviet divisions and corps were smaller than Western ones, one reason they were able to rack up such large numbers), I think a unit represents X number of soldiers, tanks, AA guns, etc. (while actual AA gun units are for dedicated anti-aircraft units which exist semi-independently of other divisions).

I’ve heard suggestions of giving artillery anti-tank capabilities, similar to anti-aircraft artillery in Global 1940 (North Africa’s anti-tank gun piece has something similar too). I think different win rates between different units is mostly represented well (as I hope I’ve somewhat demonstrated above).

@CWO:

@Erocco:

@Argothair:

Some early thoughts on your mix of units:

Many of your units are quite similar to each other mechanically, especially on land. E.g., a tank destroyer is C5 A4 D4 M2, whereas a light tank is C5 A5 D4 M2 – do you really need two different units whose statistics are within one point of each other? Another example is Mech. Inf. (C4 A2 D4 M2) vs. Armored Cars (C4 A3 D3 M2). With d12 dice, these small differences will only matter once every 12 rolls. Consider whether your players will want to buy extra minis, carefully squint at the setup, etc., so that they can enjoy the result of these small differences.

I though of this long and hard. I love to have a choice of many different types of units for every situation. I own most of the HBG sculpts so I figured why not.

Just a comment on a possible middle ground between two valid points: your valid point that having special extra units is fun and interesting, and Argothair’s point that having too many special units – some of them having only minor differences between them – complicates things excessively.  A possible way to split the difference is to have a rule saying that, out of the full range of available special extra units, each power is only allowed to buy X types per game (say, for example, 2 types).  This helps to keep things manageable, because each player only needs to remember the specifications for a very limited number of extra types, not for dozens of them.  It doesn’t restrict game-to-game variety because, from game to game, the various players won’t necessarily buy the same special units.

An additional concept to consider would be to have certain types of special units only be available to certain powers, rather than to everyone.  This could result in interesting situations in which the opposing forces can never be precisely matched in composition…and it would also have a historical basis, because in WWII not all powers fielded every type of weapon.

I should start posting some of the work completed to date because that’s exactly what I’ve done. Every Nation has 2 specific units with the exception of Italy which they have one (ideas for a second unit are welcome) and depending on the unit you can only build 1 or 2 per turn. So anything you suggesting CWO Marc has been implemented.

@Frederick-II

If you move 2/3 through original territory, does that count to a nearby enemy territory? For instance, if I take an army from Vienna, can I move it 2 to attack Poland or am I forced to wait in Galacia?

For me, it’s getting more historical accurate play of nations in WWII that actually fought. I find it very strange that Vichy France and Co-Belligerent Italy isn’t in the game, obviously it is hard to do this.

There were a few wars fought in South America in the early 30’s. I don’t know who had who’s backing in those conflicts. There was the Guerra del 41 between Equador and Peru. I know the US supported Peru and Japan supported Equador, but I’m pretty sure that support was from the bleachers. The only equipment I can tell you for sure that was used was the Czech LTP (Panzer 38t). These were used by Peru.
Peru had all the gear. They actually prepared for war. This lead to Peru having a 3-4 to 1 advantage in men and equipment. Except for tanks. Equador had none. Peru had around 25. Take a wild guess at who won.

:|
Or, use A@A pieces on a risk board.
    Infantry are worth 3 reinforcemint point
    artillary are worth  4 points
    tanks 5
    fighters 10
    bombers 15
    transports 8
    well, you get the idea.
Build a factory, (15 points) and all the units that you buy to place there, cost 2 points less!
  Protect it well, if a enemy captures it, then they can use it.
    The only way to get from one continent to another is with a transport “bridge”. One transport per dotted line is enough to ferry your army/armies across.
   Use A@A combat rules, and movement, or risk combat and movement, your choice on what you are comfortable with.
It will be a slower game than Risk, but interresting none the less.
  I think I will set this up this weekend and see how it plays myself. It could be a good cross-over to get Risk players  interrested in playing A@A.  :wink:

Bottom line, have fun!   :-D

How do you move units? Imagine a diagram of WW2 history on the A&A mapboard. You would see arrows going back and forth across the territories. In my solitaire AAR, each dummy nationality follows those invisible arrows. I have listed below each nation (in caps) the name of each arrow or track it follows { in ellipses} and then each territory it follows. The tracks have opposites from opponent countries (in other words Sylvania has A,B,C,D for a track and Fredonia has D,C,B,A for a track. RUSSIA {Northwest Direction} Russia, Archangel, Karelia, Eastern Europe, Germany. {Western Direction} Russia, West Russia, Belorussia, Eastern Europe, Germany. {Southwestern Direction} Caucasus, Ukraine, Balkans, Germany  GERMANY {Western Front} Germany, Western Europe.{African Front} Germany, Italy, Libya, Anglo Egypt {Army Group North} Germany, Eastern Europe, Karelia, Archangel, Russia {Army Group Center}Germany, Eastern Europe, Bellorussia West Russia, Russia {Army Group South} Germany, Balkans, Ukraine, Caucasus {Atlantic} all ships ttosea zone 8 COMMONWEALTH {East Mediterranean Anglo-Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Italy Germany {West Mediterranean} Algeria, Libya, Anglo-Egypt, Italy, Germany {Atlantic} sea zone 8 JAPAN {Mainland Asia} Manchuria- Kwangtung, China, Sinkaing, French Indochina, India {Java} Japan, Philippines, Borneo, East Indies {Australia} Japan, Okinawa,Carolines New Guinea, Solomons, Australia, New Zealand {East} Japan, Midway, Hawaii, Western United States, UNITED STATES {MTO}Eastern US, Algeria, Libya, Italy, Germany {ETO} Eastern US, Britain, Western Europe, Germany {PTO, Army}Western US, Australia, New Guinea, Philippines, Borneo, Japan {PTO Navy}Hawaii, Midway, Solomons, Okinawa, Japan {CBI} Western US or Germany, India, French Indochina, China, Sinkiang, Japan

the debate was never settled. i said why i didn’t think it should be liberty ships are no one rebuted. i never thought US DD’s were on the table, it was Essex CVs (cheap because rushed into production and fast) that I thought had the lead spot.