Possible free For All?

@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.

My friend and I have been developing some rules for a Free For All on the Global 40 Board. Each country has a special unit and unique national objectives. Here is a rough outline, let me know what you think:

Countries:
Germany - 30 IPCs - Blitzkrieg Ability
Russia - 37 IPCs - Movable Factories & Factories placeable anywhere (movement of 1)
Japan - 26 IPCs - Yamato (24 IPCs, 3 hits to kill, 4 - 4 combat value)
America - 52 IPCs - Marines (4 IPCs, 2 - 2 combat value, +1 attack during amphibious assaults, destroyers & cruisers have can carry 1 each similarly to a transport)
Communist China - 4 IPCs - Cavalry (4 IPCs 2 - 1 combat value, can move two spaces, no blitz)
China - 9 IPCs - Cavalry (4 IPCs 2 - 1 combat value, can move two spaces, no blitz)
United Kingdom - 21 IPCs - Commando (5 IPCs, 2 - 3 combat value, can be paradropped by a bomber in which the first hostile territory the bomber goes over it has to be dropped, or can just be a noncombat)
Italy - 10 IPCs - Armoured Car - (5 IPCs, 3 - 2 combat value, can blitz)
ANZAC - 10 IPCs - Commando
Canada - 7 IPCs - Commando
India/FEC - 17 IPCs - Gurkhas (4 IPCs, 2 - 3 combat value)
France - 19 IPCs - Fortifications (5 IPCs, up to 3 per territory, +5 IPCs for every existing fortification in the territory, enemy armies cannot blitz through and enemy infantry cannot pair with artillery)
Netherlands - 12 IPCs - Colonial Infantry - (3 IPCs, can place in any originally owner territory)
Middle East - 8 IPCs - Jihad - Does not have to wait a turn after declaring war
Nordic States - 5 IPCs - Finnish Winter Soldiers - (3 IPCs, 1 - 3 combat value, no enemy blitz)
South American Federation - 8 IPCs - T-Boats (4 IPCs, can carry 1 unit, 3 movements)

Rules:
Ideally each country is controlled by one player.
All nations begin at peace; war takes 1 turn to declare.
Each country has its own national objectives.
Some units have been changed around with the setups; however, the majority of the setups have remained the same.
If you conquer a country you may choose to puppet a portion of it.
There are no pre-established alliances.
When two nations are at peace they gain a trade bonus.
Countries may form alliances, non-aggression pacts, request military access, declare war, and lend lease.
Oil derricks give the controlling power 1D6 roll of IPCs.

Thanks for the input guys, I made some adjustments and changes, and will republish a new version with some updates based on your suggestions as I integrate them.

BEF:  I agree that putting them in London is easy.  I think those two UK pieces on Paris are some of the fluffiest on the entire board, yet they are always killed on turn 1.    I wanted there to be a flexible choice;  keep the pieces in france and make taking france a bit harder (thus altering the basis of the G1 opener), or put some pieces somewhere else to keep them guessing.  This is different than a bid because part of the purpose is to make France a bit riskier to take, and to make a new reason for Germany/Italy to want to kill it quickly even though there are 4 UK units there.  Also, UK can counterattack Paris on UK1…

French Guiana;  a friend mentioned this; I added the concept that they can place naval units offshore.  However, I didn’t want to give the French the ability to place infantry there because I don’t want them to be able to simply walk to brazil and take it over.

New Hebrides; isn’t a territory.  New Caledonia is.  I wanted FIC and new Caledonia to be potential new places to put a small French thorn in Axis’ side

Cruiser vs Fighter;  Great point; 12 is pretty much their entire budget.  I didn’t think it was very apt to give them fighters, because armor, fighters and tacticals are bread and butter offensive units.  I wanted to make France more like China, where its choices are limited and it cannot build an attack stack in the same manner as a regular power.  If we permit the French to have fighters, we would have to come up with a different explanation of why they get them (not assorted naval forces but secret aircraft factories?) and they are extremely gamey (fighters do a lot.  adding them in means that I would choose them over anything else.  Id buy fighters wherever I was allowed to and send them on desperate defensives and sorties).

Part of my thinking here is that France already has 2 cruisers, which occasionally live.  This and the single fighter from UK would be their only “3” attacks, and then only during an amphib, and therefore be the only offensive contribution france could make.  I didn’t want to give the French the full range of choices because I like the idea of them remaining a nerfed power, but one that could raise a force of infantry and even transports, but not much more punch or mobility than that allows.

Thanks for the discussion and please continue.  Taam.

Hi, just want to shear a simple, but fun FFA house rule. You can have quik matches that only takes a few hours.

This has only been played on the anniversary addition.

pick a nation (has nothing more to say than what color you start with) through dices to establish who starts. pick any country value 1-6 you want to start in, role a dice, if the dice shows more or equal to the country you picked you place a factory and an AA, and your turn ends. If your dice role is less than the value of the starting country, you can’t place anything, and you turn ends. This is only for the starting country. each country you want to capture you have to fight that country’s value worth of infantry (a 1 value country, fight one infantry. 10 value country fight 10 infantries) optional: if you want a faster game, and more initiative to attack each other, and encourage allies against the strongest, you can set victory condition: reaching the end of the (72) income table.
-you don’t play with national objectives, other that that movement/combat rules are the same

Plz tell me what you think, or have any improvement suggestions. Have tried this a couple of times and it’s really enjoyable.

@knp7765:

That is a good idea about limiting the Japanese Kamikaze use until they are kind of pounded down to a low income. The Kamikaze was a weapon born out of desperation after all.

Yes, and in addition to the pressure of Japan being in such a desperate situation, there was another related factor at play: the more the war progressed, the fewer top-notch pilots Japan had at its disposal.  Japan’s training philosophy prior to the war had produced an elite corps of pilots, which gave Japan an initial advantage but left it in a worsening position as the years went by and their casualties mounted.  The US Navy, by contrast, figured out that training large numbers of competent pilots was a better investment than training a small number of superb ones (especially since the US could produce enough aircraft to take advantage of its abundant pilot supply).  When Japan’s situation became dire enough in late 1944 for it to consider extraordinary measures such as kamikaze tactics, one element which worked in favour of the kamizaze concept was that it required very little pilot training: the pilots basically just had to learn how to take off, how to fly to their targets and how to go into a steep dive.  This kind of rudimentary flight instruction was the opposite of the elite-oriented training philosophy Japan had followed prior to the war, so it would make sense to have a rule saying that Japan can only make kamikaze attacks late in the game once Japan is on the ropes.  Maybe this could even be seen as a kind of tech – a capability which isn’t available at the start of the game, but which becomes available later when certain conditions are met.  With a normal tech, you need to invest money to gain the new capability; in this case, kamikaze attacks (a kind of reverse tech because it reflects a training downdgrade) would become available when Japan’s economic and strategic situation drops below a certain threshold.

@Gargantua:

I like 1B, that’s not bad.

But it’ll make things like 8 transports 1 destroyer a HELL of a force to deal with. I’m not convinced…

Maybe they could operate like AA for eac 2 you have paired or something…

Well with 1B, then only the destroyer and 1 transport would get to defend, and the transport could only hit air units.

I see your point if your talking about 1A though.  So maybe 1B?  I just don’t think having transports have absolutely zero defensive capabilities whatsoever is neither historically accurate or fair.

For 2, i think I’ll leave them at 6.  It seems allies are a little bit behind in this version, and the 6ipc tank rule hurts germany more than anyone else.

I understand you’re point of you but as I like to be historical.
My Vichy rules is: When France falls, All french territory become Vichy ( except Congo = Belgium)
But UK- Free French player may influence some Vichy territory to join free french.
1 attemp pert turn. cost 2$.
You must have 2 or less. If you win, Vichy territory and unit become FFL and can be use in combat.

@Cobert:

I like unlimited attacking (in Risk only), it adds an element of surprise since you can attack right into your opponents gut.

Im playing a free-for-all game later tonight.  Im probably going to be Russia, jus to add a challenge.

I sense an early treaty with Germany and a war with the UK in my future…Russia in africa/india might not be a bad idea.

ithink japan will be the most intresting to play. probably most likely to piss everyone off. it has no common enemy everyone except german yis in the grasp of japan. even then if japan want safrica they may start a war. you may have to give up ypu 2 eaxstern countries as appesment. but don’t forget to attack sinkiang first turn.  w.r russia should fall to you to so german should evacuvate it 1st turn.