Y’re correct, US had to service a big navy also. Germany was all about infantry the last years. Y’re numbers are per turn/round right?
Yep they are per turn/round.
@Imperious:
Its best to take what the peak armed forces were for each nation to determine the max at any one time. plus much of this information includes totals from navy, air and land, when you only need land ( army) as the figure.
In which case Japan needs to be reduced to UK’s level.
Although I was modelling Japan’s dictatorship and thus considered them to be able to raise more if they wanted to.
A further realisim touch,
different values of infantry raising capacity for a territory when its controlled by different powers.
Its hard to imagine Japan turning Chinese population at Kwantung/China/Sinkang into Japanese troops. Manchuria I can understand. Pacific Islands I can understand (colonies rather than Nations).
that last idea is too complex IMO.
yeah it is
thats why we don’t have it in AARHE :-D
In my opinion we shouldn’t rely on history to elaborate a rule for limiting infantry builds.
After all, i’ve never seen an A&A game go exactly like history… (Anyway, not when I play with Germany :-D)
This game is an alteration of history. Imagine if Germany really conquered egypt on R1… How many people would have decided to join the axis instead of the allies, imagine the ressources involved. More oil, more money, more manpower. This has to be taken into account.
This is why the rule for limiting infantry builds should be related to the number of territories (IPC’s) you own at the beginning of your turn. (Example 50%: of IPC’s allowed for INF builds)
So, If Germany has 40 IPC’s at the beginning of their turn, they can allocate 20 IPC for INF builds (6 INF) which is reasonnable in my opinion.
Same rule applies for all countries.
This will limit the stacks of white and red chips on our capitals…
I just want to point out again that the issue concerning realism isn’t just about the number of infnatry, but where the infantry can be placed. This is the major reason why I designed the victory city infantry placement rules the way I did where the infantry placemnent maximums are per victory city and not per nation. It’s important for a nation to be able to palce some infantry close to the front lines to easily speed up the game and to realisitcally model how infantry are raised. I used the varying cost per infantry to create an incentive to place infantry closer to capitals.
You can say that the UK can use 50% of their IPCs on infatry, but if all the infantry are placed in London that’s not very realisitc IMHO. Many of the infantry divisions were rasied steadily at each of the commonwealths. This is one example why I think infantry placment limits per space (not just per nation) is important.
So, If Germany has 40 IPC’s at the beginning of their turn, they can allocate 20 IPC for INF builds (6 INF) which is reasonable in my opinion.
Funny thats exactly the answer i made to start my response in this thread.
This game is an alteration of history. Imagine if Germany really conquered egypt on R1… How many people would have decided to join the axis instead of the allies, imagine the ressources involved. More oil, more money, more manpower. This has to be taken into account.
Well for that we play with the Neutrals.
Depending on different situations the Neutrals give income to axis or allies or neither.
