Hm…actually which heading does the rule come under?
We might need a new heading.
Germany =
Italy =
Japan = Control orange territories plus China, India, Australia, and New Zealand
USSR = Control 20 IPCs more than start
UK/US = Together control more of the following then USSR: Western Europe, Germany, Southern Europe, Manchuria, Japan
This is in addition to controlling your capital.
Germany =conquer Russia, while holding to all original territories in europe including norway/finland
Italy = Control x amount of territories in africa and x amount of african neutrals
Japan = Control orange territories plus China, India, Australia, and New Zealand ( add Hawaii, specific islands in pacific)
USSR = Control ( i think they need to control germany, and all german occupied territory in former eastern europe, plus manchuria)
UK/US = Together control: Western Europe, Southern Europe, Japan, africa, all japanese islands in pacific.
This is in addition to controlling your capital.
++++ some problems: Mancuria was occupied by the Soviet Union in the closing days of ww2, also Japan was never occupied ( of course its under the western allied players influence for Victory conditions… work needs to be done)
USSR’s requirement to control Germany is good. Don’t know about Manchuria. Is it for “freshwater port”?
My UK/US rule is based on capitalisation of majority of major IPC centres.
I think yourUK/US rule is about territory control.
In which case UK and US should be separated. UK might be Africa and southeast Pacific islands and US might be about north and central Pacific islands?
USSR’s requirement to control Germany is good. Don’t know about Manchuria. Is it for “freshwater port”?
+++++ all i can tell you is they jumped into manchuria to have a clain at the peace talks. Their intent was to get back the part of the Shakelin Islands that they lost in the war of 1904 and also control the direction of where China would go into.
My UK/US rule is based on capitalisation of majority of major IPC centres.
+++++ yes right it will take some time to get this equasion right.
I think yourUK/US rule is about territory control.
In which case UK and US should be separated. UK might be Africa and southeast Pacific islands and US might be about north and central Pacific islands?
+++++ in the pacific UK will have to hold on to its original territories, but its victory is kinda spoiling the Soviets and their gains in ww2.
example: as far as the war results the allies won but Soviets won as the individual player with USA second and UK third… why? because UK wants to keep the balkans free of soviet control, along with norway. IN the real war norway was not captured and the balkans were taken by stalin.
Oh yes Balkans is a strategic region.
But I think the require shouldn’t be too strict. My suggestion of majority control of a list of territories is modelling a net effect. Like if overall the situation might be better even though a particular territory is lost.
Yes the values to obtain national victory conditions may allow a player to win even if he had not taken exactly all his territories… other territories can be substituted.
Oooh so we made end up with a table having 5 columns. Values of territories respect to a particular power.
Maybe like the value of Australia to Germany is 0 lol.
Well not really but a point value that must be achieved no matter what, with a few options as substitute.
Ok no tables back to lists.
UK = spoiling USSR’s gains, so don’t really need gains in Pacific
US?
this along with Neutrals’ “starting diplomatic position”, need your historical background to fill in National Victory Conditions
Germany
Take all of Europe?
Take all of Africa? or is that for Italy…
Here is a couple ideas for VC’s…
Historical:
Russian - Taking over Germany (that is a kiss condition if I ever heard one, atleast for Russia).
German - Must achieve Lebensraum or take over all Victory Cities in “Western” Russia (Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow), this was it’s main political aim for the war, Afrika was merely the “money maker”.
Britain - Free “Free” Countries of Europe, and Capture Germany. Britain if you think about it represents “Free” France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Norway, and maybe a few others I have forgotten to mention. Its goals are to free Western Europe, Balkans, Eastern Europe, Norway, and Capture Germany (Before the Russians ofcourse.)
Italy - Re-establishing Roman Rule over the Mediterraenean and Africa (It must control Italy, Balkans, Algeria, Lybia, Egypt-Sudan, Italian East Africa, and Gibraltar.)
Japan - Establish Co-East Asian Prosperity Sphere of Influence, Chinese Territories, All Islands, Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii?, Midway?, and India.
USA - Capture Germany and Japan
GG
Historical:
Russian - Taking over Germany (that is a kiss condition if I ever heard one, atleast for Russia). Yes and Manchuria, balkans, Finland, Mongolia, eastern europe buffer zone
German - Must achieve Lebensraum or take over all Victory Cities in “Western” Russia (Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow), this was it’s main political aim for the war, Afrika was merely the “money maker”. Yes plus you would have to add either UK or German control of UK’s colonies in the middle east and suez
Britain - Free “Free” Countries of Europe, and Capture Germany. Britain if you think about it represents “Free” France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Norway, and maybe a few others I have forgotten to mention. Its goals are to free Western Europe, Balkans, Eastern Europe, Norway, and Capture Germany (Before the Russians ofcourse.) Yes right plus maintain control of her original colonies.
Italy - Re-establishing Roman Rule over the Mediterraenean and Africa (It must control Italy, Balkans, Algeria, Lybia, Egypt-Sudan, Italian East Africa, and Gibraltar.)
Yes exactly.
Japan - Establish Co-East Asian Prosperity Sphere of Influence, Chinese Territories, All Islands, Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii, Midway, and India…. exactly correct!.. perhaps add alaska to anchor the northern sphere.
USA - Must insure that western europe and southern europe is not soviet, and all japanese occupied territories are taken and Japan is occupied Dont let more than 2 territories in asia fall to the soviet player.
Russia - There I start to disagree… Historically speaking if the game is still in 1942, The Non Aggression Pact is still in effect and Breaking it will not provide the element of that remaining “Historically” speaking… Possibly achieving certain “Geopolitical” control, maybe it will get more complex…
Germany - My point was that they mainly wanted to mantain a presence in the east politically more then a economic presence in the Mideast…
Britain - That was a general “Condition” I thought that “fate” would express :-D… In fun conditions, I think you might have the same conditions… Maybe additional IPC control…
Italy - Thankyou for your support!
Japan - Great minds think alike! 8-) I didn’t add Alaska merely because it was more of an “afterthought” (compared to other Japanese Campaigns) to divert US combat attention to the north as well as establish a blocking place to prevent a Northern Invasion of Japan, compared to actual Japanese political goals…
USA - Hehe, now Uncle Joe has competition… I like the preventing idea and limited capture (That one might be a little tough), but capturing all Japanese Territories? The goal was to take Japan, not necessarily Island hop, although with the advent of long range bases, it became necessary to take them out. I think it is more of something that occurs in AaA then an actual goal…
GG
USSR: I like the establish buffer zone approach
Germany: USSR being than UK on their radar sounds about right…too bad the game modelled UK as 30 IPC and USSR as 24 IPC…
Italy: Mediterraenean…I don’t think Italian East Africa is neccessary though
UK: It think losing some colonies is fine, its more about whether overall position improved I feel
Japan: Alaska is little far stretched for me…if anything Russian far east is a also a north buffer for Japan
US: no comment
(In fact, a radical idea would be that besides the UK/US pair…all powers can declare war on each other.
You then lose your team victory “point”, but can still seek the national victory “point”…game after round X…
Anyway ok I’ll keep this to myself.)
Could you guys compile everything, like a list of rules so I can follow?
sure I’ll finish that asap
this one is gonna be quite long compared to phase 1
for now read about phase 1 to get an idea
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=6743.0
it comes with justifications in italics :-)
phase 1 covered different aspects to phase 2 mostly, so shouldn’t be too confusing
like “Income” and “Turn Sequence”
that looks great! good job on the additional embellishments!!! :-D
now the same thing on the rest and we can sit nice and pretty! I think some of those combat ideas need to be rescripted.
Im working on new player aids for the additional new units so they can be plugged in.
@Imperious:
that looks great! good job on the additional embellishments!!! :-D
Um…we actually had that from weeks ago… :?
Im working on new player aids for the additional new units so they can be plugged in.
That’ll be great.
Try to make it similar to the old one so people feel comfortable and familiar.
Certainly we gotta update the Game and Turn Sequence on the player aid cards.
It will be the same format… just updated with our rules. Italy will have one too. along with neutrals
