Posts made by JimmyHat

ah but you don’t get tech until at war, So at best US is saving money for 1 turns worth of free tech, because after that they will spend those ipcs for troops.  My main concern is Germany saving ipcs so the turn they take Paris or London they might get additional free dice the  next round if going by CoH.  If going by income then countries cannot do this.(one of the reasons why income is better than CoH)

Current Neutral Blocks Proposal.

Neutral Blocks
SAmerica- all territories in Samerica minus Brazil.
Middle East-Turkey, Arabia, Afghanistan
Iberia and Colonies-Portugal, Spain,switzerland and all African neutral territories including Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Mongolia is removed from the ‘strict neutral’ camp and is added to the Japanese/Russia non-aggression pact.  If Russia attacks Japan, Mongolia remains neutral all game.  If Japan attacks Russia Mongolia immediately joins Russia, replace Mongolian troops with Russians and place control markers on Mongolian territories.

Sweden is removed from the ‘strict neutral’ camp.  It is now tied to the German NO for Swedish iron ore.  So long as Denmark and the Baltic Sea is free of allied units or control Germany collects a 5 ipc NO.  While Germany and Russia are neutral they do not block this convoy route, however once at war it can be blockaded by any ship, including subs or trns.  If Russia controls both Finland and Norway then Sweden will join the Axis at the beginning of Germany’s next turn.  Replace units with Germans.

Amended Force Pools for Neutrals
these units are in addition to the printed on infantry numbers located on the gameboard
Argentina) 1 aa gun, 1 artillery
Venezuela)1 artillery
Chile)1 artillery
sz65)1 dd
sz66)1 dd 1 CA
Turkey)2 artillery 1 armor 1 fighter
Arabia)1 fighter
sz100)1 dd 1 CA
Spain)1 aa gun, 1 fighter, 1 armor 1 artillery
Liberia)1 dd 1 sub
Mozambique)-1 artillery
Angola)- 1artillery 1 armor
sz91)1 dd
sz92)1 dd 1 CA 1 sub
Sweden)1 artillery 1 armor 1 fighter
sz114)1 dd 1 CA

Miscellaneous
When a neutral block is attacked, all other territories within that block immediately join the opposing side.  Players choose which power the entire block will join.  All units and territories are replaced with the new controlling power and they will collect ipcs for remaining territories in their next collect income phase.

Added Switz to Iberian block, added units to Safrican Neutrals, switched Liberian inf to dd/sub to represent interned Vichy ships.  Added units to Turkey and Arabia.

12/4 edited Swedish Iron Ore NO.
12/5 finalizing
Adding this to 1C we get additional rules;

US loses its 10ipc NO for controlling the US if it violates neutrality, this represents costs incurred by the US for setting up banana republics.

An attack by an Axis power on any strict neutral territory while the USA and/or USSR are not yet at war will result in USA and USSR given the option to declare war on any or all Axis powers.  This constitutes a provoked declaration of war and therefore would have no other ramifications in regards to other theatres.

If an axis power attacks Turkey when it is a strict neutral and Caucasus is not axis controlled, the Soviet Union preemptively destroys oil production facilities in Azerbaijan as part of its scorched earth policy. Germany may never again collect the 5IPC Caucasus oil NO, even if it controls Caucasus.

I’m saying each rule we add to Delta should be added to fill a development hole that Larry left us.  Not totally arbitrary and meaningless.  I don’t want a delta rule book that has all these little rules that you have to know about…KISS wins and this 5 ipc limit is not KISS.

Poorly made board for our board game.:(  Sure wish they would release a new copy of the board with corrected and clarified borders.

@Cmdr:

Unless we get a sudden flury of votes, it appears the rule stands as currently written (I editted it to include the max 5 IPC saved from last round to be counted for FREE DICE, it can still be used for units, obviously, or saved again.)

dumb idea.  Arbitrary limits added just for clutter?

@Cmdr:

Wait, we’re locked into 1C still, right?  It won the vote and I believe that was determined as done and over.  We’re just talking about added units and whether or not there should be any and if so, how those added units are, right?

Jim, you raise a good point on Sweeden.

However, keep in mind that America’s not going to be attacking S. America.  Why?  1)  They lose their 10 IPC sovereignty NO negating any benefit of attacking S. American territories income wise.  2)  They allow the Axis to land in S. America and annex territories.  3)  There is no utility for America by taking Chile, Venezuela or Argentina (and defeinitly not the no ipc, no army territories!)

Lastly, Germany can already attack Turkey and crush the 8 Infantry there.  Why is adding 2 Infantry and an AA Gun to Turkey going to make that bad - is it not enough?

It sounds like you think US won’t attack any true neutrals because of the loss of a 10 ipc NO.  I don’t like that but it can be adjusted after play testing if it turns out the US is out of the picture.

I have Turkey with an aa gun, a ftr and an atry I think, perhaps a tank.  I also added Turkish fleet units so that if Germany takes Turkey, Russia gets a fleet to help defend the Black Sea.  IF Russia attacks Turkey Germany gets some ships in the Black sea to compensate.

Also don’t get confused by how this works, you attack a neutral, and the rest of the block turns immediatly.  No ‘pro-axis’ or ‘pro-allied’.  That is because as you point out US can attack Colombia and if the rest turns pro-axis…well Axis won’t be ever getting near SAmerica again.

@Cmdr:

Given this, why not say a nation may save up to 5 IPC (since they come in 1s, 5s and 10s) in any given round to apply towards getting a free technology roll next round.  This is about the maximal end of any nation’s realistic savings in any given round is far short of “buying” a die without spending money.  We’ll also conceed that Treasury Money does not count for your free dice - but may be used to purchase dice! 
No reason to limit the amount someone can save, it may be a poor tactic but lets not remove it from play.  Also I agree that you can spend your ipcs any way you see fit and that includes tech.

National Objectives - the major source of Germany, Japan, Russia, America and Australia’s income (if attained) will count towards your “income” to determine what free dice you may or may not qualify for.
I agree that NO’s should count towards this.

Ok, haven’t gotten input from Mantlefan yet but I hear he’s banned again so not sure when/if he’ll be able to contribute.

I have an idea of where it will go but Special forces keeps poking holes in it!  Darn him!

My position(not mantlefans) is that limiting extra dice to 4-6 means minor nations cannot buy extra dice.

Secondly, I vote for going from CoH to Income at the beginning of your turn.  NO’s included…that you hold at the beginning of the turn.  Its very simple because you just look at where your ipc token is on the chart, and add any NO’s you hold right now.

I gave a bunch of reasons a page ago as to why this is the preferred method.  Most of the reasons are one’s Mantlefan came up with, but that doesn’t invalidate them.

@JimmyHat:

@Cmdr:

There was a lot of talk about adding defensive firepower to neutrals.  JamesAmeman’s idea was a really good and well thought out idea on how to do that.

Ok, well its cool you like his idea.  I thought it was rather prohibitive because it did not specify neutral blocks, and therefore would punish an attack on neutrals even more than it is now by adding various units.

The only thing I did like about it was the availability to change the neutral force pool by deciding what units you wanted to add based on the incoming attack force.  However this was pointed out to be a failing because people could build aa guns if being attacked by air for example.

SO, lets see what we have here.  If we add James idea to Vances proposal we can see that SAmerica will probably never be attacked.  If US attacks Venezuela on US 4, then the SAmerican block would get what…20ipcs of units added?  24?  And so america will never attack SAmerica.

If German decides they want to invade neutrals, and head for Turkey G2 or G3, they are going to be facing 6 more ipcs of units to defend Turkey?  Scary.   At least UK gets an additional…6 ipcs of units to help defend from Arabia.

Oh and Sweden?  In James incantation (married with blocks) no one would be foolish enough to ever threaten it.

Its a bad plan.  It doesn’t go with the neutral blocks we have already ironed out, and its complicated.  Now you sell me on why its sooo hot.

here it is again why James idea doesn’t work.  I’ll break it down further.

US on Samerican block:
  US cannot declare war on these countries until it is at war, the Axis get to decide when US is at war.  Lets say the are at war US3.  That means if US intends to invade Samerica(the block) they will have to fight 6 ipcs X3(Samerica is worth 6 ipcs, over 3 rounds)  That means the Us needs to beat 6 additional infantry to the one’s already in the target zone.

Germany on Turkey:
  Germ declares war on Turkey G3 and hits it heavy.  Turkey is now reinforced with 12ipcs worth of additional units, lets say 1 aa gun 2 inf?  Either way it is nothing compared to the hurt Germany puts on Turkey in preperation for an attack on the Caucusus G4.

Russia on Sweden:
  If Russia ever got close to sweden it will be too late.  3ipcs over x rounds is going to make it impregnable.

The other option is by territory, in which case Turkey is now a breeze for Germany and SAmerica is a quagmire.  I didn’t even get to Iberia and the fact that after Turn 5 or 6 it is undefeatable.

I just wish she’d respond to me sometimes.  Instead of misreading what I wrote or ignoring it all together.  Not like I didn’t call it though.

Your confused because we are no longer talking about James idea, due to the reasons I gave earlier.

@Cmdr:

@JimmyHat:

wrong. All nations were on par for tech.  You pay 6 ipcs, you get a die.  Then you roll to see if you get tech.  With your system the little guys are getting the shaft because they cannot afford 15ipcs for a die let alone 48 for 4.

No.  No one has to buy a die.  Major nations get 2, minor nations get 1.  It’s the way it’ll mostly turn out, I don’t expect people to buy dice.  If we’re worried about them buying dice, raise the price to 30 IPC a die!  I want free dice, I just dont want to ban purchased dice!

notice my use of past tense, as in earlier versions of the game.

@Cmdr:

@JimmyHat:

Also this whole tech structure puts the corn cob to the minor powers.  Guess it might only be best in 2v2 games or less.

How so?  Now these minor powers actually have a chance to get technology - whereas before they had no chance to get technology.  If anything, it gives them an actual shot at participating and thus not getting over run just because Japan decided to drop 60 IPC on the market over 6 turns and got every major technology out there.

wrong. All nations were on par for tech.  You pay 6 ipcs, you get a die.  Then you roll to see if you get tech.  With your system the little guys are getting the shaft because they cannot afford 15ipcs for a die let alone 48 for 4.

Yeah, simple.  Like take your current income from the income token…currently at the beginning of your turn…add NO ipcs from NO’s you hold currently…like right now.  And then see how much tech you have.

CHina was not included because China is the most likely to save income because it can place unlimited units.

@mantlefan:

Great. Now you’ve unilaterally determined what the final rule is. You admit it wasn’t codified, but then say it’s the final rule. So much for democracy.

She does that, don’t worry about it.

On your scenario with your child.

1: why are NO’s not included?  
2: How is counting your money simpler than looking at your income token and then adding the NO’s you hold?

In the example, 27ipcs aren’t special, 7 are: because they were saved from the previous round.  Still…its irrelevant because how many ipcs you hold doesn’t matter…we’re looking at your income token.

haha!

erp, SAtlantic!

hmmmm, Perhaps Switzerland should join Iberian block?  There is also an option to have US pay ipcs to violate neutrality, although I would rather not use that rule. US designs on Iberia is one of the things I am worried about, as well as all usage of Turkey.  I still think that by beefing up the defense we can make it hard for US.  Spain also had relatively modern weapons so increasing their force pool is historically accurate as well.  I would like to playtest this, anyone want to try and start a game this weekend?  Sunday works best for me but also Saturday around noon-4 CST.

Yeah, 8 votes on 5 options and every option got at least 1 vote.  Sad thing is only 6 people voted…on 5 options.

I guess when you have 50 options and 51 people vote, there’s a chance the ‘majority’ is 2.

@special:

@JimmyHat:

The allies wouldn’t attack spain unless they could keep Saf safe as well.  Also I added 1 inf to Liberia so that the allies have to worry about that as well.

Okay, 1 INF to Liberia may be counter productive for Axis, as taking FWA from France makes it a potential +1 IPC for USA to come grab.
And yes, Allies need to check S.AF, but that is what i meant with some planning and preparation, should be not that difficult to deal with. Surely worth dealing with if you can have Spain for it.

Even risking S.AF in return for Spain would be ok for some players, i think… (and 4 INF can’t do that much in attack…)

If Turkey seems like a weak spot, how about amending the force pools for the other neutrals in its block?  We can add 1 art 1 ftr to Arabia for instance.  Or perhaps a dd?  That seems much easier than having territories that can influence mutliple blocks. 
Also I agree with adding an aa gun to Turkey, I think I did that.

Well, the good part of the original neutral rules were that things happened out of your reach, so while i am certainly not against adding an AA to turkey (and yeah maybe you already added an AA, i just checked the texts on page 11, or 10), there should be longer-distance consequences to taking Turkey as well. Things too far for a side to control (that is why i’d let Turkey overlap the neutral venndiagrams)

good analysis.  I see you’re points about Liberia and Saf…

It would be just as easy though to add an art or perhaps tank to Mozambique/Angola to increase the cost of attack.  Also don’t forget that Iberia got defensively increased as well so it is not as easy for anyone to take.

You make a great point about FWA and the Liberian inf.  I think you broke it!:(  It defeats the purpose to place the inf there if it ends up benefiting the allies in the long run.  Perhaps a significant increase to Mozambique/angola would do the trick instead?  That or adding 1 dd 1 sub to Liberia instead.  Now an attack on Spain would require neutralizing those SAtantic raiders as well.