G40 Free For All

@Panther

Thank you for taking the time to explain.

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.

And that would reflect what the Allies actually did in 43 when they invaded Italy via Sicily.

Sorry for the late reply. I told Seancb I would post his PDF for him. It got lost in my dice mailbox :)

A&A Global realism rules.pdf

@Young:

So, if people want me to design them custom house rule card decks, I will have to charge a fee for my time or risk divorce.

Divorces are expensive, so charging a fee one way or the other is probably a good idea.  :-D  But all kidding aside, I sympathize with the time issue – there’s never enough of it available in life, especially when an abosrbing hobby like A&A gets added to the equation.

@CWO:

@Young:

The problem as it is right now (if it actually is a problem) is that the Axis powers (Japan in particular) will absolutely profit the most for capturing enemy cities (Japan will essentially claim up to $9 for cities that are easy to take and hold), so to add a Chinese capital city for no reason but to give Japan yet another target to profit from may unbalance the game.

Fair enough.  As I said, it was just an idea that I tossed in for fun in case it it turned out to be worth considering.  It arose from the discussion of the player capitals versus the cities, and I didn’t scrutinize it in any detail because I wanted to leave it up to you to decide if it worked or not in the context of your house rules.  So I have no problem with the idea turning out to be problematic.

No problem, I greatly appreciate all your suggestions and there have been some great modifications because of them, I guess my problem is that I have played over in my head a lot of angles to these objectives, and it’s very easy to tip the scales of balance when restructuring an entire game mechanic like this.

@Imperious:

Tanks could go to 5$ not less, or game imbalanced. Heck for $4 id only buy tanks.

Done

actually perhaps you get discount of 1ipc but you must buy in two’s

complimented it with mobile industry instead, makes for a tough choice against “Trans-Siberian Railway”

Id rather you go with “Rasputita” and create a winter rule in Russia twice per game that effects Axis units in some manner.

There’s a Russian Winter rules in the “Alternative Rules” portion of Delta found here…

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33730.0

All the discount units creates imbalanced games, certainly because we got 5 allies and 3 axis, so allies have a +2 advantage just in these rules.

Perhaps, but the Axis have the slight advantage when it comes to the “Strategic Objectives” portion of Delta found here…

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33734.0

I think only Russia and USA should have any advantage that effects prices. The other nations didn’t have capability to build cheaper units.  Colonial troops should only be something that allows placement in some area w/o having a factory ( just one unit per turn).

Perhaps, we’ll find out more when some play test reports get posted.

I read numerous posts about historical rules like a separate Canada and rules for Vichy (just to name those two)

Since most of you seems to agree that the game is in favor of the axis, how do you (re)balanced the game if you use those two rules(canada and vichy) or any other one that sesns to slow down allies or advantage axis ?