Axis and Allies Pacific and Europe: 1940 House Rules

@Imperious:

Infantry get trapped in pockets and artillery are fixed positions. I want to make only minor changes and not start a new game built on the old one. AARHE is a dramatic change and these ideas came from it, but they are minor changes.

yes but when armored forces do engaged they tend to lose a higher percentage of their force comapred to infantry. It dosnt seem realistic that armor is so survivalbe when it when amored forces tend to more quicly lose their streagth in battle.

@Imperious:

I feel the rules regarding damaged carriers creates too many rules to support the various cases and its not helping the bottom line. it should be streamlined.

I think the game has to be played a few times before you can make that call.

@Imperious:

Thinking of allowing them both to move and attack one space, then attack a second to give them some blitzkreig value.

thats a good idea.

@Imperious:

Also armor cost 6 and players will be less inclined to use them.

tanks at 6 and mech is too weak at 1-2-2-4… this makes them more viable now to have them retreat.

Well, in the pacific game i agree they are not going to be too particularly useful(except maybe in china), but that is just realistic.

I think we will have to see AAE40 before we can decided if the new mech infantry and armor rules need to be tweeked.

What would be good house rules for U.S. Marines like from the original AAP? The same?

U.S. MARINES
Movement: 1
Attack Factor: 1 or 2
Defense Factor: 2
Cost: 4 IPCs (USA only)
Description
Only the United States has Marine units, these
are the dark green infantry pieces. Marines normally
attack just like infantry units (with a roll of
1). However, they are more effective in
Amphibious Assaults, as explained below:
• A Marine unit attacking in an Amphibious
Assault scores a hit on a roll of 2 or less. A
Marine unit that enters combat by moving
from one land territory to another land territory
may still attack with a roll of 2 or less as
long as at least one friendly unit attacks from
a sea zone making the battle an Amphibious
Assault.
• For each artillery unit attacking the same territory
one Marine unit may attack with a roll
of 2 or less.
• For each artillery unit attacking the same territory
in an Amphibious Assault that is not
paired with an infantry unit, one Marine unit
may attack with a roll of 3 or less.

Should this be modified to make them a viable unit you may want to buy sometimes?

Has anyone considered changing the airfields with house rules? I love the idea of airfields in the game. The scrambling is a great idea based off CAP from AAP41. The new rules are improved though. The extra movement point with the new rules doesn’t seem to be much of an advantage. Adding one movement point doesn’t help much because you really need two movement points to make it usually worthwhile. Whats the point of moving 5 spaces most of the time? You need to land some where and you need 6 to go further. I also don’t really like the old airfields from AAP41 because they made the fighters move too far across the Pacific. I think a good house rule would be that you need a airfield to land on an island at all. That way strat bombing would really mean something. You damaged their airfield and they can’t take off until they fix it. Now, you would be able to land on the continents(Asia including Japan, North America, Australia) without one but, then it would give you a bonus move (5, or 7) for the advanced airfields in more industrial areas then some jungle island. I think the cost would have to change too. 15 is too high if you needed them to land planes. Maybe 6IPC? Still can damage them up to six and inoperable at 3 damage. I think this would add to the historical flavor of the game by capturing islands to build airbases on them.

Thats a good idea. Why couldn’t fighters in India scramble to defend Burma and then move one space back to India in noncombat? If you can move one space to the sea to defend you should be able to do so on land. I will try that in one of my games as well as you have to have an airfield to land fighters on islands.

@Admiral_Thrawn:

Thats a good idea. Why couldn’t fighters in India scramble to defend Burma and then move one space back to India in noncombat? If you can move one space to the sea to defend you should be able to do so on land. I will try that in one of my games as well as you have to have an airfield to land fighters on islands.

I think the idea is that the inland is already in the sea zone, so the fighters on inlands are not accualy moving to defend, because they are already in that sea zone.

I do find it wierd though that airfeild only provides aircraft with one extra space of movement.

Capital ships should take two turns to build.  You pay half the cost when ordered, and you may delay the completion of the ship indefinitely.

Should incompleted hulls be eligible as casualties?  Clearly they have no combat ability, but are likely to be protected by the port rules described by IL.

And trains! Trains, trains, trains!

Land movement in A&A is a complete joke without them.

I favour defender retreats for any unit after a round of combat, but using the suggested rule allowing tanks and MI to retreat - shouldn’t this only apply if infantry is left in the territory to “cover” the retreat, perhaps on a 1:1 basis?

I’m liking the retreat rules IL. It helps boost the benefits of building MInf. I’m sure we’ll have more reason in E40, but I want to experiment with this stuff now.

To some of the others RE: airbases - The 5th MP for fighters is very handy. Everyone seems to think it’s no good without a 6th because you can’t go 3 out and 3 back. Try going 3 out and 2 back (especially as Japan!) Very handy for keeping the Americans at bay.

Also love the island airbase rule (needed to land on island).

How about adding a blockhouse rule?

Mechanized and motorized infantry were developed to be a combined arms force and to counteract infantry with AT guns and infantry held weapons like piats and bazookas.  What about giving the mech infantry in AAP40 +1 when paired with armour?  And to counteract the worry that artillery won’t be built, allow mech infantry to tow artillery, simulating the mounting of artillery on half-tracks and self-propelled artillery.  This would probably require a mech infantry cost of 5.  Any comments?

I like the way this is going, but some limits should be in place so things don’t get out of hand.

1. I agree air bases should be allowed to scramble to adjacent land tt or sz. If you allow unlimited scramble, you may be creating super stacks. How hard would it be to take Moscow if Russia and UK had 10 ftrs each protecting just 10 inf in front of them in multiple tt. Maybe only allow 3 air units (maybe even 6 w/upgrade or tech) to scramble from such tt. Instead of one AB being able to scramble say a dozen air units into multiple tt, you would need to invest in bases to get more air units into the air. If each ftr/tac represents say 50 units, that would be 150 planes, how many could they actually get up to def from one AB.

I’ve not liked the unlimited scramble from island bases (not realistic to be able to put that many units in the air IMO) but I could live w/2x the units for islands then for coastal/land AB. If you use some kind of cap then SBR could be worked in similar to minor IC’s and production.

2. Going back to UK/USA being allowed to move units onto Russian soil, I would like to see some kind of lend lease instead. Maybe allow limited allied air units to come and go to attack Euro axis or to def AB (maybe they must land only on tt w/AB), but no allied ground units on orig Red tt. You could either send ipc’s or do limited ground unit conversions. I prefer send $ or build red units at home (not from newly built IC) then send them.

3a) I don’t think you should give mech a +1 when paired with a tank. You already get tacs +1 paired with tanks or ftrs. I like the Mech can tow an art 2 spaces. That would give both units more meaning (but shouldn’t be allowed w/def retreat).

3b) I would be on board w/art getting a pre-empt strike @ 2 against amphib, every round that it is paired with an inf. (enemy casualty doesn’t fire back) Many people like this house rule.

4. Def retreat is very intriguing. I hear some say only 2 move units or air should be allowed to retreat after the 1st round, and it makes sense. I also hear the plea that some inf could get out as well, but art would have a tough time. I’m not sure if I like the fact that the enemy (defender) could always save his more valuable units to set up a counter strike. If you allow these 2 move units to def ret, then you should allow the aggressor to retreat them (or attack on) from the front as well (maybe only if they still have one move point left).

For def ret why not role dice after the 1st round to see which units are eligible for def ret based on there def roles. Bmr would need a 1, mech inf, inf & art would need 2 or less (roll all at once, retreat in that order starting w/all mech etc…), tanks would need 3 or less (50/50), other air units would just be able to retreat or stay (no roll). I know it doesn’t save time, but at least you would not be allowed to save your $ units every time. You could roll just your 2 move units (rd#1), any inf or art would not get the option until rd #2 if they are still alive.

5a) I have not used any in port rules before. Your really talking about a sz (harbor) w/in a sz. I would think that ships considered in port would spend a movement point by coming out of port, but not going into port? If you need to repair a ship you just need to reach the sz w/port and declare you are now in port (maybe move the ship(s) to a named port card to distinguish). When you decide to leave the harbor you then use 1 movement point to get back to the (outer) sz w/port (on the playing board) so you can only move 2 more sz once you leave port in your turn. Of coarse if you are dislodged on your enemies turn, you should still get your 2 moves, unless one of your allies liberated the tt w/port before your turn comes around, then you would get your full 3 moves I would think.

5b) I would think that enemy ships should be allowed to come into your (inner) harbor sz and attack ships in port along w/air units, as long as they clear the (outer) part of the sz 1st. It would normally take two turns to do this if the power going into port left a DD in the (outer) sz, unless the enemy could arrange a can opener. Even then with allowing scramble from any AB you could still def yourself in both turns. I also think that if ships are attacked in port then the port itself should be allowed to fire at enemy ships each round at 2 (1 shot each round) shore gun. Any AA gun on the tt w/NB should also be able to fire at planes attacking ships in harbor (inner sz). The AA gun could not be used for both naval def & def of the land tt ground troops however. (maybe w2 AA guns you could do both?)

Edit: I see you have given NB ports AA cover in your orig post to cover your navy in port IL, so you have covered the last part of my post. I would still like to be able to attack ships in port w/navy once you have have cleared the outer part of the sz, in your next turn. You would still be able to def your self a little better in port if you allow shore guns. I know some would argue that ships in port would not be able to def them selves as well and should get their def rolls modified down. I could live with that I suppose. On the other side of the coin there should be a price to pay for enemy ships coming into your harbor as well, so maybe your ships def shouldn’t be nerfed?