More practical rule change

@djensen Yes, the old forum software allowed to somehow cluster the mass of top categories, so they appeared more sorted and compact. Now the new theme had them all showing up in a somewhat endless list, that’s why categorizing appeared to be a valid solution to us.

Obviously categorizing (top and sub) is not the best way to give categories/forums a logical structure by clustering forums that thematically belong together. As de-emphasizing or hiding has never been our intention.

So instead of breaking the idea of having reasonable groups of forums - are there maybe other supported tools that allow us to group our categories reasonably, preventing from “top and sub, de-emphaszise and hide”?

Here are some of the rules I liked that are different:

Naval spotting - makes sense, maybe add +1 to spotting roll if sub or plane present.

Research - I’m assuming those are free rolls.

AAA - firing before each round.  At 5 planes seems a bit steep.

Cruiser (AA) - That’s a house rule I already use.  Makes them a little more useful.

Railroads - I’ve seen and used them, but with a limit to units moved.  But since your limiting it to 2 spaces.

Research Focus - A research tech for your research roll.  Brilliant!

Heavy transports - Another one in use.

Sonar - Interesting concept.

Not sure on the “Dodge” concept.  Thanks for the listing of your rules.

@UltimateChaos:

Yea you are correct. I guess POWs would never really work in this game because unlike real war it does not matter how many men you lose

I’m not convinced the idea couldn’t work, only that the current idea of it wouldn’t work.

How about a situation where, for every 3-5 infantry you kill, you gain a PoW that can be placed anywhere. PoWs need to be protected from liberation and every PoW in a province over it’s IPC value costs you 1 IPC/turn in support.

Results:
You don’t muck with the balance around attack/counter attack and amphibious assaults.
You’ve got incentive to distribute the PoWs you capture and risk their liberation, rather than stock them in your capital.
The Axis, generally considered the stronger side, will take brunt of the downsides since they are killing large numbers of Russian and Chinese infantry. Might actually balance the game.

Hi Procas!

I like the concept. The main difficulty I see with a 2 ipc rule though, is that the some of the major transcontinental railways that existed at the time would violate the rule (by passing through 1 ipc territories.) The Trans-Siberian, Trans-Canadian, Tran-Australian would all be out for example.

Something along the lines of what Narvik suggested might be workable, but there the issue would be max capacity of the rail lines. For example, it’s conceivable that some units could be redirected from one end of the rail network to the other, but not all units at the same time. So would there be an upper limit on how many units could move around like that, within the broader region they control by rail?

It might be interesting if the total rail capacity was somehow related to total production capacity of a Nation. For example, if the max number of units that could be moved around like this, was limed either by your total IPCs or by the number of nearby factories, or something of that sort.

The idea of caping the movement at 2 for all ground units would fit with the concept generally, but would definitely diminish the value of tanks and mech as others pointed out. A bonus of +1 to all units, is another alternative, though this would dramatically increase the value of tanks and mech. Its an interesting trade off, but on the whole expanded movement makes me a little nervous. It really needs to be handled delicately, since it’s much more powerful than expanding say attack or defense values. The long range air tech, or ABs have been an example of this, and they can be very potent, and crazy game changing.

I still like the idea of a rail base though, or some kind of rail component to the factories, or ways for Infantry to move at an accelerated pace under some conditions like those.

Yes, I was talking about those, I was also thinking about their role in sea battles (against Subs):

Unlike fighters, they don´t need to end their move in a territory with friendly Inf, but they can move max 3 spaces away from a territory with friendly Inf

If there is an Airship involved in sea battle then:
Enemy submarines can not submerge and they can not surprise attack
Airships roll one dice against enemy Sub, hitting it at die roll of 2.

Well these maps are OOB. IN a few cases, i added IPC for neutrals. Other than that, the only change from OOB was added Azores so with long range bombers Germany could reach the east coast.

oooo I like the options the germans get with swapping the bat for an acc.

That’s got to come in handy!

I was referring to sun tzu’s comments and land battles, sorry for any confusion