I’m curious if anyone out there is using the victory cities either as they are OOB or for their own house rules?
I’m not sure I understand the question. How would you play without victory cities?
Thank you, good question. I knew what I was trying to ask but did not convey that clearly in my original post and poll.
I revised the poll question. What I meant was do people play with the victory conditions set out in the rulebook or some sort of house rules?
I answered other. When I play, we usually have a capital as a determiner. For instance, if Moscow falls, victory is given to the Axis unless the Allies are making loads of money or have an army that will trash the Axis in the next round. It can shorten the game by up to 1 hour.
It depends on the version of A&A we play.
@Herr:
I answered other. When I play, we usually have a capital as a determiner. For instance, if Moscow falls, victory is given to the Axis unless the Allies are making loads of money or have an army that will trash the Axis in the next round. It can shorten the game by up to 1 hour.
Same. There is generally no point in continuing the game if Moscow falls. Unless it is somehow apparent that the Allies have a shot at Berlin immediately. But Moscow usually just ends it.
This is why I really do not care for the victory city-based winning. All the non-capital victory cities are basically meaningless unless you are playing some kind of minor victory condition where the Axis don’t need any capitals.
My OP was referring to AA42–I didn’t explicitly mention because I had posted in that subforum but the Mods moved the post here. :?
I understand exactly what you mean about calling it after Moscow falls–we usually do the same.
So is a minor victory scenario any fun to play? The “minor victory” conditions in the rulebook seem odd since capturing 3 VC would mean the axis have to take Leningrad, Calcutta and one more—probably Moscow or Honolulu. Moscow falls in line with what everyone is saying, BUT Honolulu? Seems like an odd VC choice.
Here are our victory condition house rules, it works really well for us….
Victory Objectives and Victory Tokens
Once a victory objective is achieved, a victory token will be awarded, the side with the most victory tokens at the end of the day wins the game. Victory tokens are awarded immediately upon completion regardless of when, or how the objective was achieved, and a token can never be taken away or awarded twice for the same objective. It doesn’t matter which game round the game ends, however, a win or a tie can only be declared at the end of a full game round.
Optional Rule: The first side to achieve 3 victory tokens will immediately win the game.
Here is a list of all victory objectives for each side.
Axis Powers
London
The Axis control London
Moscow
The Axis control Moscow
Calcutta
The Axis control Calcutta
Sydney
The Axis control Sydney
North Africa
The Axis control Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Tobruk, Alexandria, and Egypt.
Pacific
The Axis control 6 victory cities on the Pacific map
Europe
The Axis control 7 victory cities on the Europe map
Global Economy
All 3 Axis powers have a combined total of 136 IPCs on the income tracker
Allied Powers
Berlin
The Allies control Berlin
Rome
The Allies control Rome
Tokyo
The Allies control Tokyo
Africa
The Allied powers control all territories on the continent of Africa
Paris Liberation
The Allies have liberated Paris
Philippines Liberation
The Allies have liberated the Philippines
Asia
The Allies control both Hong Kong and Shanghai
Pacific Fleet
There are no Japanese Capital ships on the board
YG do you see more action in N Africa with these victory conditions ?
Why shouldn’t there be much action in N.Afr.? There are several NOs for control of the region in the original game. Britain loosing Egypt and axis tanks on their way to the Mid East and sub-Sahara Africa is nearly a great blow to the allies as a Japanese conquest of India. (Maybe even greater…)
Italy usually needs German help. If Germany drives straight at Russia then the Allies can usually control the med sooner. With the N Africa victory token I am wondering if it encorages Germany to commit more to the med
Just like the historical example Mussolini definitely needs German support.
Especially if the Italian BB doesn’t survive the British 1st turn. (Should be the case in a normal game.)
A bunch of fighters are a great help in Africa.
Btw. of all Victory Objectives, the “African” ones are the easiest to achieve.
My OP was referring to AA42–I didn’t explicitly mention because I had posted in that subforum but the Mods moved the post here. :?
Oh, yeah, sorry I didn’t realize that. Though it is pretty much the same for G40 or any of the smaller versions.
So is a minor victory scenario any fun to play? The “minor victory” conditions in the rulebook seem odd since capturing 3 VC would mean the axis have to take Leningrad, Calcutta and one more–-probably Moscow or Honolulu. Moscow falls in line with what everyone is saying, BUT Honolulu? Seems like an odd VC choice.
I think the premise of a Minor Victory scenario is interesting and sounds fun because it would have different objectives for the Axis (besides just going for Moscow). However, in practice we never play it. Mostly because even if the Axis can get Leningrad, Calcutta and Honolulu (or any other combination of non-capitals) the game is usually far from over. The game is still highly contestable and the Allies may only just be hitting their stride. Calling the game for the Axis at this point is kind of annoying for the Allies. Neither side has truly vanquished the other.
Not to mention that a Minor Victory would probably not have happened historically. The Allies were committed to fight for total victory. Even though the Axis never took any of those cities (and probably never could have), I doubt the Allies would have agreed to end the war if they did.
YG do you see more action in N Africa with these victory conditions ?
Before the victory objective house rule, our group would ignore Africa as the Axis and use Italy to defend Paris and Rome while the Germans made a mad dash for Moscow. This seemed wise considering that a Cairo capture meant little to the Axis even when needed for the 8 city condition in Europe, because we quickly found out that a Moscow crush would easily force a surrender. The African token for the Allies is one of their easiest if there is a successful Taranto raid, so even if the Germans got Moscow and the Allies got Africa… it would only be a tie game at that point. However, we have seen lately the Allies not doing Taranto and sending the UK Med fleet back to England because the idea of the Germans jumping on London for a token is a real threat to the Allies because the Germans don’t need to hold London in order to be way ahead early in the game, then the Africa token for the Allies becomes even more important if London falls. Ultimately it is still very difficult for the Axis to get their Africa token, but I have found that the Axis at least try to deny the Allies their Africa objective, because if the Axis abandon Africa early and the Allies get ahead with a early token in Africa, than Paris and Rome are vulnerable and an Allied win would not be far off.
We are also working on modifing this house rule to allow a nation to gain a free development roll when a victory objective is acheived.
Egypt (i.e. the Suez canal) was Britain’s lifeline to the Asian dominions and colonies.
Perhaps combine all UK/India/Anzac economies, but if the canal is lost it must be divided into East and West. Therefore, taking Cairo for the Axis stops UK spending all combined income in the European theatre.
