How much would the game change if…....

Hey guys, since I am constantly messing with my National Objectives, testing them, trying to incorporate Feedback, I did one more adjustment which are progressive objectives:

e.g. you now get 5 IPCs for fulfilling “Lebensraum” fully, but you still get 3 IPCs for only fulfilling it partially. All other Nations but the US got these and I think this change is a lot of fun. Also some other objectives have been adjusted because they seemed to be too easy to get for certain nations.

Again, you can also download the Triple A file and copy it into “downloaded maps” and you can play it :) Just use the link at the end of this post.

ab28beb6-20bb-475f-aadb-27c23b6ad2ab-image.png

4d84b47f-cd67-4ffa-9aa8-93a6e9996fad-image.png

And a final Screenshot that shows the changes in Triple A:

2716c502-69ac-4a97-bd56-09d104bdd7b3-image.png

Use this link to download my map. Make sure to copy it into “downloaded maps”… where you store all your other games of Triple A.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/zwxtqwoz2m9jc78v58zr1/AMEjiQc4dL6Lrc8oFxrYgkM?rlkey=7z5s63t8y3wkofzwclrkq3qsc&st=ddwilwbw&dl=0

@nolimit said in Balancing the 42.2 game without the need for Bids:

Since I really Hate Bids with a Passion, I propose to move existing units around some just to balance the game!
GERMANY: Move Norway fighter to Baltic St, move NW Europe fighter to Germany and move One sz 9 Sub to sz 23- this will Dumb down the Attack in sz 7!
UK: Move W Canada+New Zealand Infantries to India, move S Africa Infantry to Egypt, move sz 14 Cruiser to sz 10- this would beef up their Defense in those New positions!
US: Move Central US+Midway Infantries to Sinkiang, move sz 19 Cruiser to sz 11- since those units are useless in the beginning setup, they would make China+Eastern US coast more defenseable!
Me thinks it could be an improvement on the Larry Harris alternative setup IMHO, gracious thoughts if you please!!!

Ha finally.

I would use these rules:

(1) if the defender sees a key battle coming and can predict that they’ll want an unusual order of loss, they can leave a note, send an e-mail, etc., informing the attacker of their preferred order of loss, and the attacker will then follow that order.

(2) if there is no note, the attacker will provisionally use a standard order of loss.

(3) after seeing the results of the battle, the defender can pay 2 IPCs to the bank per casualty that they want to switch. You didn’t want to lose your bomber after all? Fine, pay 2 IPCs, and you can have your bomber back in exchange for one of your infantry. This should be expensive enough to deter casual abuse but still cheap enough that if you would really be upset about the order of loss, you can fix it without too much drama. Don’t think it’s fair that you should have to pay to set up your order of loss exactly the way you want it? Well, then, you should have foreseen the battle and given orders in advance. Don’t feel like thinking that hard every turn? Well, then, you can always just cough up 2 IPCs. It’s a way of speeding up the game while making sure that nothing unacceptably bad will happen because of order of loss issues.

My concern was not related to turn 1 or 2 but to later German turn:
9 additional Art for a Russian counterattack may cause a problem for Germany advancing to Belarus or Western Ukraine or one turn later to Bryansk, because Italy cannot take this area first (RU takes it back before the German turn) and therefore G cannot land their air on top of it’s army.
12 additional Inf may delay a G 6 attack on Russia (Simon33 was faster while I typed this post).

My concern was based on a game otherwise played without bid or only with a small bid (for example: balanced mod;  our group with other houesrules).
If you play OOB-rules with a bid around 30 IPC, then Gargantua’s idea is very fine (I already understood that he only wants to make one simple adjustment), the inherent bid goes to Russia and does not destroy the game in the MED (as usual IMO).
I will have to try it to see more effects.

Some good ideas here.  This got me to thinking… if someone really wanted to play France as a country, buy units, etc.; then you could play it this way:

French player starts out with the Allies, but once Germany takes the capital, they play with the Axis.  The capital and all territories remain in French hands and they still retain their income and build on their factories.  When/if the Allies liberate Paris, the French player then joins the Allies.  Each time Paris in taken, any French units in territories occupied by other nations remain Allied and usable by that nation (like the French fighter and soldiers in England and boats in the same territory as the British).  If the Allies take Paris, any French units with German/Italian/Japanese combat units in Russia/Germany/the water/wherever are usable by that nation.  The rules are mirrored for if the Allies take Paris: France retains control of their income and all their territories that they control and simply fights with the Allies.

Aspects of this would actually be similar to how it was in the war.  Although you didn’t have stacks of French soldiers defending Normandy from Allied invasion (though some French soldiers fought for the Axis), you also didn’t have the French Mediterranean fleet, Morocco, and southern France fighting against the Axis after France capitulated.

I’m not sure if this might even be balanced or whether it might swing to Allies or Axis.  The push towards Russia would be hampered as some units would need to come all the way from France and those units would attack out of turn from Germany, but on the other hand the Axis would have more total income and a D-Day invasion would be much harder.

We always play with all the Axis playing at once and all the Allies playing at once, so that would likely give the Axis an advantage, but you could compensate by giving the Allies more money.

As an optional rule, you could allow the Japanese player to conquer French Indo-China (just as in the war and just to spice things up) or leave for the French player (maybe France could build a factory there?).  This decision could be strategic by the Japanese player: allowing money to flow where it’s most needed, or it could be cordial: gentlemanly to leave it to your new co-belligerant, or it could be playfully poking fun: haha, it’s mine and you can’t do anything about it.  It might make the Japanese player less ‘lonely’ to have some interaction with their co-belligerants.

The French player might have some disconnection with who wins (or might slightly favor Axis since that’s where their reputation as a skilled player is on the line), but on the other hand, it might be a happy ending to be on the winning side no matter which side won the game.  Another plus is that for a Europe only game, the sides would be an even 3 on 3 for the nations for most of the game and it might allow you to have a 6th player on the Europe only board.

Hmmm, How do I alter the topic title? It says 1942 as the year - that was a mistake - the darn thing took so long to type.

If you just want to change from D6 do D12, then just double all attack and defenses values, unless you want to edit costs and powers to satisfy historical details, such as better german tanks, etc. But then you have to mess around with initial deployment too (if russians are gonna have weaker infantry, then they need to start with more of them, right?).

I have a 30 sided die i got as a gift. So i’ll just multiply everything by 5 :D

Infantry at 5/10/3
tanks at 15/15/6 :D

I don’t like $10 NO’s, too all or nothing
Russia should have 3 NO’s, each wirth $5
first as normal (red territorries is interesting)
2nd for allies controlling nor/fin
third for euro territorries

USA should have another $5 NO in pacific

sorry I am short on details, perhaps I will post my ideas better when I don’t have house guests  :-P

I like the thread Jen, +1 karma!