Rohr,
Yeah, I remember that thread.
It’s too bad I live way farther North than all of you… Rules like these could get refined much more easily, at least for the group that would be testing them out. I have quite a collection of pieces and such myself.
Just wondering here. Have you guys considered implementing fog of war elements into the game? If so, how? Do you think it would slow the game down too much? Is it even viable with your ruleset?
The way I would do it is have 3 boards setup (one for Axis, one for Allies and one for a referee). I’d have a system setup to have reconnaissance in the game, and other ways of information gathering (informants, spies, etc, if it’s possible). You would need separate rooms and a way to communicate wirelessly (like with skype or something of the sort).
I thought about doing it a while ago myself, but as for many others, there’s lack of space, material and willingness on my friends’ part.
Well, I’m just looking at the law of averages here with what’s been given to me on the board. Yes, you can get diced, but over 95% of the time, Germany’s standard opening move will defeat France everytime providing the German player is aware of how to play properly. With the 2 impulse ability, you concentrate your newly created forces on Paris (you should not build navy or units that only move 1 for this to work properly). Sea Lion preparation can start on turn 2 if that’s what you like.
I sunk the British home fleet and took France without the impulse with 6.1 in 2 turns, it is possible. I will provide the math later if need be (I actually will this time if it’s requested) to show how Germany’s opening move can defeat France without a real risk of failure.
I stress here: I wish I could play a few sessions with you guys lol, it would make things much more convenient, and let me enjoy the game :). (And Koba, I believe you and I have yet to meet in person ;) ).
Anyway, the 2 impulse ability was what brought about Russia’s buff in 7.0, I truly believe, and what made the Axis overpowered in 6.1, as I’ve rhetorically stated before. If I could, I’d show you what I mean, I just don’t have room or ppl to play with anymore.
I’ll try to write it out here though. If I do get a chance, here is how I’ll do it (along with some minor house rules I’ve put in, which I can rehash if need be): obviously remove 2nd impulse and give Germany the ablilty to attack anything exactly like they do for the first surprise attack against Russia, except that it would be 5 battles or so (this also represents the upper hand Germany had at the start of the war); give Germany back their 2 U-Boats in the Baltic Sea from 6.1; start Germany with at least 40 IPC’s; setup Russia exactly as they were in 6.1; having Russia roll 1d12+1d6 for income instead of 2d12; restore Japan’s surprise attack to how it was in 6.1; and finally, keep everything else in 7.0.
I will admit that I do prefer to play the Commonwealth more than any other nation because I’m Canadian (can you tell? Lol) and controling almost 1/3rd of the board at the start is awesome (British Empire FTW haha). I will also state that I have played my share of the game as the Axis, which I would guess would be about 35% of the games I’ve played on that board. So I’m not ridiculously biased, I am trying to give you guys my best objectional view here.
I will also mention that even though I love this game, I never get a chance to play it. I won’t really be able to provide any reports on sessions for testing rules, unfortunately…
I don’t have any discrepancies to point out at the moment, I’m sure they’re being taken care of for the most part.
What concerns me a the moment is something a little different than what would normally be considered for balancing. I mentioned this in a thread last year, but I don’t think it attracted much attention.
Has anyone considered that France, being a 20 IPC nation/power, just falls too early in the game? It has the potential to do so much more than what it’s currently doing. It’s comparable to Italy in almost every way. Imagine Italy being knocked out on turn 1, every single time. Does that help convey what I’m trying to explain? Please let me know…
I might be biased when I say the 2 impulse ablilty Germany has is just overpowered; I’ve never liked it, even playing as Germany… I’m not even looking at it from a historical perspective. I’m thinking the mechanics at this basic level need a rethink. It wouldn’t be the first time a well established game was revamped. I’m sure you guys can cite your own examples… I will also mention that I didn’t use the ability when I played as Germany once, and I still managed to make a huge punch and go on the offensive for the consequent turns. This was with 6.1 rules and setup. Eliminating the 2nd impulse rule will effectively eliminate the need to buff Russia like in 7.0 and still have France ultimately surrender and do the whole Vichy/Free French thing (which is something I find absolutely awesome in this game, btw) well before Russia enters the war.
I hope you guys don’t think I’m crazy when you finish reading this lol. Do you guys think this is something to consider?
Well, for what it’s worth, the Axis were overpowered in 6.1. I pretty much always saw axis victory. 7.0 does, however, look like it needs more fine tuning. I can’t say for sure though. I can’t ever get a good game going… I like alot of the changes, but not all of them, obviously. I could see the Russians starting with about 35 IPC’s and starting from 0 (like it is right now) for their income progression. No complaints about the setup, but again, I can’t test it.
Man, this really makes me wish I could join your group… :| . No one I usually play with would do this. It’s exactly the type of thing I’d like to do.
I’m looking forward to the release of 7.0 as well. I’ll be able to play again :)
It states in the rules that all income generated by the FF go to the U.K.
Refer to page 28 in the PDF file.
Sounds like fun. Too bad I don’t have anyone to try it with :/ .
I would almost go as far as to say there would need to be 3 boards and 3 rooms. One for the Axis, one for the Allies, and one for 3 referees (I’ll explain the 3 refs later if need be). I guess it would be very time consuming and complex, but very entertaining for someone such as me, and I guess for others who’d like to try it.
Or, as you said already Gargantua, the only other viable way would be to write a program/game. The greater variety of possibilities only start from there. But then we can just look to other games if you wanna go that far…. Like Wargame: Red Dragon. Idk lol.
Alot of these I do too. I have a house thread of my own here started. It’s rather old now… One thing I think that would be cool to keep from v6.1 is the rules regarding the Soviets and Nazis fighting each other in Finland without actually declaring war against one another. Just adds a neat dynamic, but as you say, for the sake of simplicity, you can make do without it.
have the 7.0 rules been released yet? and if so where can i find them?
To my understanding, 7.0 hasn’t been released yet as of the time I’m posting this.
There’s a few ways you can implement Canada.
Here’s another thread about the subject: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=29640.0
My take on including Canada is on the last page.
I’m not really able to get any more creative than what the rest of my group will allow me to be. They much prefer rules that are already written and tested. I’ve resorted to just using the rules provided by HBG. There’s a few different ways to do it, as you guys suggested. I have a couple pdf files from the site (HBG) that I downloaded, which I guess many other people already have. I’m just posting them here for convenience, if they’re needed for reference. The first pdf has the rules a few pages down for rail. I use option 2.
Well, I must say after going through this, your take on this game will function. I don’t have any real problem with it. There’s one thing that I see that would change things fundamentally, but not significantly, is the fact that you roll for income with 4 d6 instead of 2 d12, which makes the minimum roll 4, instead of 2. It’s not really a big deal though, I’d play with it. I think the Vichy rules you put in don’t really simplify things, they just change how it’s done. Why not just let Germany have control over those Vichy territories right off the bat like originally stated? Simpler, no?
And as for your math, I really don’t see how lumping everything into one sum and dividing it by what you see on the map, especially with infrastructure, is a valid way to do it. Disect the numbers. Infantry pieces represent infantry, tanks represent tanks, etc. It’s not a conglomerate of everything. I’m sure both of us have read debates on how this is done already, we just need to go back under the House Rules section and go from there. I don’t have the numbers right now on all the militaries in '39, but I can get to you on that if need be.
I remember one post a while back saying that because of the nature of the game, different powers have their pieces represent different numbers. It’s because of the balancing act and the lack of accounting for endless amount of variables, like terrain, weather and logistics, etc. Example: Germany’s infantry pieces represent an X amount of actual units. By contrast, the U.K.'s infantry pieces may represent less units than Germany, even though they only have one infantry piece each on the board. That makes doing math like this REALLY hard lol.
It really depends on how you look at it. I think special units are very cool. The more the better.
Also, the larger the scale of the map, the smaller the amount of units the piece on the board represents. I’d say 1 infantry represents no more than 2000 men here; I think it could very well be less than that. That’s fine for a group of paratroopers.
Think of the 41 board. Those pieces on the board represent way more units than almost any other board, because of the scale of the game.
Anyway, I still have to go through all that info you put up. I still want to respond to it properly.
Version 7.0 is coming out, which is effectively going to do what you’re doing here for the most part in terms of clarity, as far as I know. I myself much prefer special units and specific/unique attributes included in the game.
I’ll write up my review on this after I get a chance to read over everything. Seems like you put alot of time into it.