@barnee said in G40 House Rules Expansion TripleA Games Archive:
It’s so we can upvote when we can’t anymore. An upvote is often used simply as a easy way to acknowledge a post without having to type
See my PM, please.
Also @VictoryFirst , please.
Playing the game with 2 turns: How would it affect balance?
-
Joint attacks are too strong. In past editions they had a ‘commander rule’ ( Milton Bradley edition)which for this same point got dumped because it was too strong.
The game would definatly play faster if you used that but not really fair, since Japan and Germany will not likely make as many combined attacks as all the allies.
-
For the record, the game I am talking about is All German and All Italian units would attack all Uk units, just as if they (the Axis units) were from the same power. As to who gets the territory, I like the old Europe rules for this…if they axis cant agree, then an allied player can decide :)
-
but not really fair, since Japan and Germany will not likely make as many combined attacks as all the allies.
Il, you said it would not be really fair, yet you seem to imply that b/c Japan and Germany can make joint attacks as well that it will balance out. Could you clarify this point? With the joint strike rule, who does it benefit more, Axis or Allies?
-
Oh and could somebody please explain to me how to quote correctly…Thanks in advance!
-
Il, you said it would not be really fair, yet you seem to imply that b/c Japan and Germany can make joint attacks as well that it will balance out. Could you clarify this point? With the joint strike rule, who does it benefit more, Axis or Allies?
“combined” UK/USA/USSR attacks are much more common than German/ Japanese combined attacks. This means since the frequency is greater due to a localities of both nations, it presents an advantage to the allies.
Thats why we never allow having nations combine their attacks at the same time.
-
What about joint attacks with the Italians? Both the Germans and to some extent the Japanese (In the area around India) would have the potential to attack with the Italians. Lets also not forget that a joint attack system would allow the airforce of any Axis nation to assist its partners. Allowing the Germans to help the Italians in the Med, the Italians and Japanese to joint attack India, and for the Germans and Italians to be able to attack both France and Russia together provide benefits for the Axis that I don’t think are really being explored. For example in the very first turn allowing a modest Italian force to attack France along with Germany would free up even more of the Luftwaffe for other missions.
-
Oh no doubt it favors the Allies. Im just suggesting that it can be easy to overlook potential joint attack based Axis strategies. You can make them work. Italy and Japan could theoretically meet at India by turn 3. A combined German-Italian attack into Russia could provide lots of bonuses. For example, wealthy Germany could purchase lots of Tacs while Italy focuses on tanks boosting the attack values without each nation having to buy both types of units. Not saying these strategies are the end all be all for this type of play but when no one has even attempted to play with this style I dont think you can really discount new types of successful strategies that could be made
-
I am very excited to playtest this kind of system. I feel that even if did turn out to be unbalanced with the Alpha Setup that it would still have some truly epic combat moves. Good idea on the Italians assisting Sealion. You may be right about Italy rushing to India with Japan but what if some of the Luftwaffe came along for the ride? That would be a crazy India Crush strategy. All three axis nations…
Lets imagine this scenario. Axis turn 1 joint combat group of German/Italian land units take Paris. Luftwaffe is entirely free. Luftwaffe and Italian airforce on Axis 1 destroys British Navy in and around the English Channel. Axis 2 joint land armies of Italy and Germany help Italy take the southern European countries with less casualties for Italy. Also during Axis 2 combined Axis airforce destroys the Med fleet. Axis 3 Germans go forward with Sealion bolstered by both the Luftwaffe and the Italian Airforce. At this point I think you’d be sitting pretty as the Axis with relatively few casualties to your key units.
Also, I’m assuming this kind of joint-attack setup would change the rules regarding friendly usage of transports. If thats the case then there is a much larger incentive for Germany to be active in the Med. Not only can they attack with the Italians to help them take Egypt in this kind of situation but they can also use Italian transports to get there without having to wait 2 turns.
-
I have to point out that in AARHE we needed to install straight rules because a combined Italo-German sealion was too strong in the early game.
We made crossing Gibraltar impossible for Italy, unless it was captured and made it very hard to do this. 2 unit limit on attack and it was considered a fortress.
AARHE also made entering the Baltic impossible for western allies unless western europe and Norway were occupied at the start of the turn ( treated like a canal).
-
No sorry. I dont like a system with separate attacks. I dont like that the US stack attack separately first, then followed by a separate UK attack, because this force the Axis stack to doubble-defend. The defender rolls twice as many dice as they should and that is unbalanced.
Another issue is the management of resolving like 20 small battles in a global game. With joint attacks you resolve all this battles one time each. With separate attacks, then you’ll have to place all this units on the Battleboard twice. It will be like resolving 40 battles when you could have resolved 20, and that is time consuming. Joint battles will speed up the pace.
If you feel that joint attacks is too powerful, just make some rules. USA/UK are just friendly to USSR, but they are not allowed to share territory or attack together. Same with Japan and the Euro Axis. If the US/UK joint D-day is still too strong, just let Germany build the Atlantic Wall. Blockhouse cost 2, defend at 3 or less, can stack but not move.
-
I dont like that the US stack attack separately first, then followed by a separate UK attack, because this force the Axis stack to doubble-defend. The defender rolls twice as many dice as they should and that is unbalanced.
No no thats not how the system works:
UK attacks (rolls dice) Germans defend, both sides remove loses.
USA attacks, Germans defend , both sides remove loses. In this case the german player already lost some units in the UK battle. He is not defending with lost units from the uk battle.
You do this for each round of combat for each side when you have multinational forces.
This is not or never a double defend situation. AARHE was never played that way either.
-
Blockhouse cost 2, defend at 3 or less, can stack but not move.
Blockhouse cost 6 and boost all Infantry and artillery +1 on defense all rounds up to the IPC value of the territory.
A 4 IPC space will only boost 4 units of these types +1.
If taken over fortification is destroyed.
Suggested Topics
