Posts made by Bardoly

Could someone clarify please,

One of the UK National Objectives states the following:

“Gain 5 IPCs if Allied powers control any territory originally under Japan’s control.”

This seems to indicate that if China or Russia captures Manchuria, and Japan doesn’t take it back, then on UK’s turn he would receive this National Objective bonus.  This might be more probable in the '42 setup, because of the turn order, Russia could capture it, then UK would receive the bonus then China would build units all before Japan’s turn.

Il,

Did you create this game yourself, or did someone else?

I teach high school American History here in China to some American students, and I have a couple of students who are wanting to create an American Civil War bord game, but they are having trouble with the map and also with finding the initial force amounts and locations (i.e. inital setup) for April 12, 1861.  Can you help them at all with either of these problems? Because we live in China, getting anything from America is quite difficult.  They have already created a battle system, but they are currently stuck on the map and setup.  They have spent a lot time researching on the internet, but they are still coming up empty.

Thanks for any help.

Hey IL,

Do you still have this?

I totally agree that E. Canada and Australia (Why in the world isn’t Australia a 3 for IPC production?) should both start with ICs.  (I would probably agree with India’s starting with one, but I personally haven’t read a lot about the Indian front in WWII.)  What about Austria-Hungary’s army and war production which was used and controlled by Germany?  So, Czech-Hungary should also have an IC.  Maybe even Okinawa should also start with an IC for Japan.

Agreed, that post makes no sense at all.

@Imperious:

yes thanks for following the rules!

To not upset those against house rules threads,

They are directed to the proper section, because its easier to find stuff in the long run if related info is in one place and not all over every section. Its not upseting, but its messy way of doing business to have unrelated information in every thread and every section.

Why aren’t the House rules threads for each version of Axis and Allies in Child Boards inside of each of the different versions?  If I only play 1 or 2 versions of Axis and Allies, and I want to look at House Rules, then I must wade through all of the House Rules for each version all on the 1House Rules Board.  Of course, having someone go through all of the House Rules threads to determine under which version it belongs would be a little time-consuming, but it would be quite rewarding in the end.

I agree that the current method of defender choosing casualties is simple, so perhaps it should stay, but in war, the casualties were much more random, so here is my suggestion.

Custom create a Battle Board sheet. (A Microsoft Word table will do just fine.) Here is an example.

Battle Board
          Attacker’s Units
1   2   3   4
5   6   7   8
9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20

Defender’s Units
1 2 3   4
5 6 7   8
9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20

Now, when a battle is declared, place the units on the board on a number in any order begining from the number 1 position.

Roll the Attacker’s dice as normal, for example there are 6 units defending, 4 Infantry on #'s 1-4, a Tank on #5, and a Fighter on #6.  You get 3 hits, so now you roll 3 6-sided dice to see which units were hit. For example, you roll a 2, a 2, and a 6.  Now you re-roll the second 2 and it is a 4, so the defender lost 2 Infantry and 1 Fighter.

You, the attacker, attacked with 4 Infantry, 3 Tanks, a Fighter, and a Bomber, so you place your units on the Attacker’s side #1-4=Infantry, 5-7=Tanks, 8=Fighter, 9=Bomber.  The defender only hit twice, so he rolls 2 10-sided dice. (If he rolls a 10 or the same number, then he just re-rolls until he hits a valid target)  He rolls a 5 and a 9, so he hits a Tank and a Bomber.

After casualties have been removed, then move the survivors down to the lowest numbers and use smaller-sided dice as needed.

Continue the battle until someone wins, or the attacker retreats.

Of course, you would need to have multi-sided dice such as, 4-sided, 6-sided, 8-sided, 10-sided, 12-sided, and 20-sided, but you can find these relatively easy at a hobby or gaming shop.

This system would seem to be fair, easy to use, and a bit more historical than the current system.

Of course there could be an occasion where you attack a fleet and happen to hit his 2 fully loaded carriers on the first turn, so you decide to retreat, which results in the 4 Fighters being lost at sea, but as we say, “Them’s the breaks!”

Using this system to assign Sub hits (to make sure that it’s not on Air units) would actually not be that difficult.  You would just have to roll them separately, and if the Sub hits an Air unit, then just reroll the die until it hits a valid target.

What do y’all think?

IL,
your suggestion seems a little complicated, so here is my suggestion for SBR/Rocket damage.

In the forum, I’ve been reading a lot of grief about SBR/Rocket attacks being too powerful.  The opposite solution of limiting the total damage done per round to the territory’s IPC value seems a little too weak though, so here is my solution.

Keep the OOB rules completely, but with only 1 minor change.  (According to the OOB rules, Germany’s IC with an IPC value of 10 may receive up to 20 damage counters.)  After damage has been dealt to this (or any other) IC, you still pay 1 IPC to remove 1 damage counter.  Here is the change.  To determine production capability of a damaged IC, divide the number of damage counters by 2 and round up (if needed), then subtract this number from the IPC value of the territory.

So an example would be as follows:
Germany’s IC has 13 damage counters on it, so the German player has 3 options.
1.  Repair nothing and produce up to 3 units.  (13/2=6.5 rounds to 7 so 10-7=3)
2.  Pay 13 IPCs to remove all of the damage counters resulting in full production capability of 10 units.
3.  Pay X IPCs to remove some of the damage counters (for example- pay 7 IPCs) resulting in a total of 6 damage counters remaining which gives a production capability of 7 units.  (6/2=3 so 10-3=7)

This allows you to produce the units that you need to but without having to fully repair the IC.

I feel that this is a minimal (It stays very close to the game rules.) change, but I feel that this would go a long way towards solving the SBR/Rocket  situation.

@Cmdr:

Wouldn’t submarines still be useful as fodder pieces in large naval engagements?

Yes, but if you are defending, their defense is only a “1”, and you can’t use them as fodder for the new-and-improved-and-cheaper-kill-all-navies Bombers.

@Krieghund:

Sorry, cousin_joe, unfortunately no such rule exists.

I’m sorry Kreighund, but it really seems that Subs are just going to be too weak to use in this incarnation of A&A.  Even though their cost is cheaper, who is going to use them?  What advantage is there to using Subs other than maybe for US or Japan to send a fleet of Subs backed up with Bombers to keep the other player from utilizing their navy.  This just isn’t the way Subs were used in WWII at all.

Well said!

I agree with your rational, but I do feel that Paratroopers belong in the game.  I don’t know the solution though.  Perhaps they could only be used in attacks where at least 1 other unit is also attacking the same territory by land or by sea.  (I would make an exception for islands and perhaps undefended territories.)

Thank you for double-checking on this.  It definitely seems to make more sense to allow the Paratrooing Bombers to attack with the Tanks.

In an earlier post, you indicated that you don’t like the Paratrooper tech.  May I ask why?  Is it because it makes bombers too powerful, or is it something else?  Personally, I like it, but only because I feel that Paratroopers belong in the game.  I do think that it does make the Bombers even more powerful, and combined with the Heavy Bomber/Longe Range tech, it becomes VERY powerful.
Perhaps having a Transport plane unit(cost 6 IPC, Range 5 (7 with Long Range), 0 Attack/0 Defense, can transport 1 Infantry for Combat or Non-Combat, and may also pick up the Infantry in a different territory from the Transport Plane’s starting territoy) would be better.

I had a thought about Heavy Bombers, since so mant people seem to think that the tech is broken.

Why not let them be a 5 on Attack, a 2 on Defense, and their SBRs be an automatic “5”.

Thank you for the answers.  I have a couple more questions.

First situation:  This is an actual situation from a game we just played.  Germany has the Paratrooper technology and holds Karelia, and is really putting pressure on Russia.  It is Germany’s turn, and he has 3 Long Range Paratrooping Heavy Bombers  8-) in Germany with 3 Infantry who whould really like to visit Moscow this turn.  Also Germany has 2 Armor in Karelia, having just built them last turn.  Moscow is only defended by 6 Infantry, and Belorussia has no defenders (but is still under Russian control).  Russia also controls Archangelsk, Eastern Ukraine, Caucaus, and Kazahk with troops on each territory.  I want to attack Moscow by blitzing my 2 Armor through Belorussia having my 3 Long Range Paratrooping Heavy Bombers with 3 Infantry join in with them in the attack on Moscow.  I should be able to take it with these forces, but the Russian player says that the Paratroopers can not go past Belorussia due to the restriction on the Paratroopers flying behind the lines.  What is correct?

Second Situation:  This is a partially contrived situation to help me understand the rules better.  If America had the Rocket tech, UK had the Radar tech, and Russia had no techs, but Karelia, controlled by Russia, contained an AA gun from each of the Allies, then I assume the following:  that on Russia’s turn, he would not get the Archangelsk bonus, and on America’s turn he could fire Rockets at Germany from that AA gun, and if Germany attacks Karelia with air units, then the UK AA gun would fire at a “2” instead of the Russian AA gun firing at a “1”.

Now, if Germany takes Karelia, does the Radar AA gun still fire for Germany at a “2”, and can he now fire the Rocket AA gun at England or Moscow?

If Russia takes Karelia back, then do the AA guns revert back to each original owner, or does Russia now control all 3?

If Russia takes Karelia back during his Combat Move (of course), then may he move his AA gun to Belorussia during his non-combat move in the same turn?

In the games we have played so far, UK has basically not contested Germany taking, holding, and producing out of Karelia, but UK has either built an Indian IC (2 out of 3 games) which can help keep Italy out of Egypt or has reinforced Africa enough (with a little American help) to keep Italy out.  In the non-Indian IC game, England built an IC in Egypt and held it!  In 1 game, which the Axis won, Italy finally took most of Africa, but it was after the game had been basically decided.

I do agree, that if Italy is not contested, then yes Italy can grow to the point of being able to sway the game to an Axis win.

I didn’t vote because there is no option which says the NOs are balanced.

Some of the Axis’ NOs are easier to get than the Allies’, but the Allies have more NOs to try for than the Axis do, so after 3 games, I have to say that they seem to be fairly balanced.

Well, if Italy has aircraft to spare, then the Allies aren’t doing their job, and if Italy is moving land forces toward Belorussia or Eastern Ukraine, then he is obviously not going after Africa, which means he probably is only getting 10-15 IPC/turn.  Italy can hit Ukraine giving Germany a shot at Caucus, but I haven’t really seen that play yet, because in the 3 games I have played so far, Germany has always went north towards Karelia instead of south towards Caucus.

My group and I play with both, and have already played 3 games on the new gameboard.  The first time, techs didn’t really swing the game at all, and the Allies won.  The second time Heavy Bombing SBRs got a little out of hand, and the Allies won again. The last time, it was Paratroopers which really changed the game both for the Axis and the Allies, and the Axis won.  In all 3 of the games, it was pretty obvious that using the NOs really helped the gameplay and actually kept the games from going on too long after you had a clear winner.

Welcome!

I agree the game should be more about strategy, but you don’t have to play with tech if you don’t want to.  The group that I play with likes to play with tech, and I believe that it can make the game mnore fun.

I have 2 more questions.

Situation:  Germany SBR/Rockets the Russian IC in Caucus for the maximum damage (8), then, on Rusia’s turn, Russia rolls for tech and gets the Improved Factory Production Tech.

Question 1:  Russia only has to pay 4 IPCs to be able to produce 6 units at Caucus.  Right?

Question 2:  On Germany’s next turn, he SBR/Rockets Caucus for a total of 13 damage.  How much is assesed against Caucus?  8?  10?  12?  In other words, when you have the Improved Factory Production Tech, does it also raise the amount of damage which you enemies can do to you?