• Customizer

    I wouldn’t buy a 6-6 tank for 9 IPCs, unless it could do something no other unit could do.  Yes, it has a guaranteed kill, but 9 IPCs wiped out in one hit?  Give me a fighter for the money.  They can die too, but only if you play poorly. You should never leave aircraft on the front line unless protected by large infantry stacks; super tanks will end up like Mantaufel’s panzers in the Bulge.
    I prefer a more modest tech based upgrade and a cost of no more than 6 per unit.

  • Sponsor '17 '13 '11 '10

    I am going to start Italy and Japan with light tanks 2-2-5 and the other countries will have med. tanks 3-2-5.
    I will also have US, Germany, and Russiathe ability to buy heavy tanks 4-4-7 with Germany having a few units of Elite SS tanks 3-3-7 and only Germany having super Heavy tanks 5-5-9
    Germany, med= PZ III, heavy=Tiger 2, SS=Tiger 1, Super Heavy=Maus
    US, med = Sherman, heavy=Pershing
    Russia, med=T34-76, heavy=KV-2
    The Italians and Japanese will NOT be able to buy anything but light tanks.
    Heavy & Superheavy will move only 1 space.
    What do you all think?


  • I think it is silly to call the KV-1 a heavy tank and give it better stats.
    I also think that their is little point to having a Tiger II or Maus peice(except that they are big and cool looking) since so few of those weapons were produced in the war. Also, dont you think the German medium tank should be the Panzer IV, for it was the backbone of the Panzer divisions.

  • Sponsor '17 '13 '11 '10

    Actuall I am using Pz III and IV. When putting pieces on a board you sometimes have to use pieces that that does not always represent historically, but astestically looks better. I like using short barrel tanks when using pewter, they last longer as in not getting bent or broke. The KV-1 was considered a heavy tank before the JS series, plus it had a taller silloutte which shows up better on the board. I am making the same choices when picking my naval fleet. I agree that the Tiger 2 did not have huge numbers, but they did have them and I just want some more options for the German player. My favorite tank was the Panther with that 75L70, sweet gun and a good looking tank. If I add tank destroyer to the game, I will probably use a Jagdpanther instead of a medium tank , again, for looks. I did add the Sherman m4A1 that the candians built which will be produced by Canada.


  • yes your on the right track. You will soon need some nifty house rules to justify all the new pieces.


  • If we’re talking about adding a dedicated heavy tank unit to the game (something that will not happen in AAP40 or AAE40) then I support 4-4-2-8. If we’re talking about adding a heavy tank tech then I propose a simple plus 1 on defense for all tanks, that is, with tanks starting at 6 IPCs (as in AAP40).

    Tanks:
    3-3-2-6

    With heavy tank tech:
    3-4-2-6


  • Alright, no retreat for the heavy tank but not the same cost for all players.

    Germany 4-4-2-7
    USSR 4-4-2-6
    USA 4-4-2-8

  • Sponsor '17 '13 '11 '10

    I did have some house rules that units were a different cost for the varying nations.
    I like the concept.


  • If USSR only had to pay 6 IPC’s for the heavy tank, then why would they ever buy the regular tank which now costs 6IPC’s.


  • I think these are technological tanks…requiring a tech breakthrough.


  • If USSR only had to pay 6 IPC’s for the heavy tank, then why would they ever buy the regular tank which now costs 6IPC’s.
    I think these are technological tanks…requiring a tech breakthrough.

    Bingo!


  • As far as tech goes…… I think the countries who actually developed these technologies should automatically get them during the course of the game instead of spending money hoping to get lucky.
    Historically they were developed so ther should be no luck or chance involved in getting them. There should be a timeline board which indicates when each country gets its new technology.


  • Historically they were developed so ther should be no luck or chance involved in getting them. There should be a timeline board which indicates when each country gets its new technology.

    Well it’s not bad idea but we should have the choice get a new weapons before the timeline.
    Heavy tank and katioucha in 1942?
    Jet in 1944?
    Heayvy artillery in 1943?


  • Well then, maybe you could spend IPC’s to take the chance of discovering it early, but if you have no luck you will get it anyway when you should have historically.

  • Sponsor '17 '13 '11 '10

    Historical games are always great, but some of the fun is to develope technologies that historically were not there. I do agree , it is nice to be able to play someone like Japan and play with historical units and economy and have the rising sun all over the pacific.


  • I am all for spending IPC’s to speed up development or maybe develop something that was almost available at wars end but as far as spending IPC’s researching  something that already existed during the war, I am not for that.This is only my $.02 of course.


  • Well Brain you got a point.

    So forget weapon development for heavy tank,heavy artillery or long range aicraft.
    A simple timeline for each pieces?
    And keep tech roll for A bomb, V1-V2, jet fighter?

    Or free tech roll for each player?

    What about that?


  • Something like that….

    Let me use Germany for an example.

    Germany would automatically get V1,V2, and jet power just like they did in the war and along the same timeline. However if they want it sooner they could spend money on research. If other countries wanted rockets they would only get it by spending money on research. If Germany wanted the A-Bomb they would also have to spend money on research whereas the United States would automatically get it in 1945.


  • @Brain:

    Something like that….

    Let me use Germany for an example.

    Germany would automatically get V1,V2, and jet power just like they did in the war and along the same timeline. However if they want it sooner they could spend money on research. If other countries wanted rockets they would only get it by spending money on research. If Germany wanted the A-Bomb they would also have to spend money on research whereas the United States would automatically get it in 1945.

    Ok, but what do you think the timeline should be? in 1941 scenario, most of my games last beyond turn seven.


  • I am not sure what the answer is….

    Somebody would have to determine how long a turn is in war time.

    Are they 3 months long, 6 months long, 1 year… Maybe this has already been determined.

Suggested Topics

  • 8
  • 3
  • 21
  • 122
  • 32
  • 25
  • 48
  • 11
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

104

Online

17.2k

Users

39.5k

Topics

1.7m

Posts