Playing without dice: Removing the luck factor and speeding up the game

Divide by 6.

I find the opposite… most people like to gamble. Because they can score more hits :D

Just ask yourself… If 3 of your infantry get waxed by an overwhelming force in one turn.  Do you take the 1 statistical hit, or chance for 3 hits on your opponent!?

@radar231:

@Imperious:

A game called ‘Gigantan’ was remade and does have open bed trucks. Check BGG

Close, but try GIGANTEN, 4 players : http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/138389/giganten

Only four trucks, too big though. Lot of oil derricks, 3 barrels and 5 locomotives.

And the new version BLACK GOLD, 5 players : http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/1018738/black-gold

J. 8-)

Those are some interesting pieces. I like the locomotives.

Unfortunately leaving it for a week isn’t an option.  We could take pictures and reset it, but the players tend to change based on who is available.

I like the grand battle idea, we may give that a whirl.

Tac bombers should not be able to do as much damage as strat bombers. We have same rule, but the tacs damage is halved rounded up for 1-3 damage to a facility. Far more realistic.

You get to choose in that case. If you choose armor, your attack suffers. If you choose infantry and you take, then you face the possibility of inadequate fodder for enemy counter attacks

I just have a problem sinking a piece without even rolling a dice.
Same thing here.
You must rolling die to sink a warship escorted or not.

The only long range sortee by unescorted battleships that I have ever heard of are the German convoy raiders of WW II. I just feel that there should be some penalty for a player doing such a foolish thing in AA. Maybe a one shot attack and then submerge is enough.

Either subs attacking unescorted capitol warships get 1 roll, if a 1-2 ship sunk on 1st hit. if sub misses,sub is considered submerged,breaks off attack,but if it stays in sea zone to try again next turn or follows same shipsinto another sea zone to try again next turn, destroyer and cruisers detection roll is upped to 1-4 becouse sub is known to be activly prowling area.

Well if a player let his warship alone, it could be destroyed.
Sub must continue his attack after the first round of combat or warship alone can escape after the first round. - But I prefer the first option-.

Recently I saw some Player Aid/Reference Charts made by Imperious Leader.

First of all the picture background are absolutely works of art.  Very nice indeed.

What intrigued me was the Order of Play.  The normal standard Order of Play is

1. USSR
2. Germany
3. UK
4. Japan
5. USA

The one on IL’s Players Aid is

1. USSR (Turn one only)
2. Germany & Japan
3. USSR, UK & US.

For those of you who have played with the latter.  What advantages & disadvantages with this order of play.  Also, how dramatically does it change the game?  Does it affect balance of play?

The most obvious one I see is that it can be more historically accurate by allowing the allies to do combined assaults.  However, I see this as more beneficial to the Allies than the Axis.

I love copy and paste  :-).

I am a big fan of Diplomacy, but can’t imagine adding simultanious movement to A&A. First, as Imperious Leader noted, there would be a large amount of moves to write. In Diplomacy a leader has to write at most 17 orders, but will generally need to issue 5-10. In Axis and Allies both the number and the complexity of the orders increases.
Second, writing down orders will likely serve as somewhat of a deterent to inivation. For example; as Germany I draft a set of orders to strike the U.S.S.R at Causcus and Karelia. If I suddenly see a stronger strategy that involves me completely changing my orders for both countries, the time I already put in that will be lost and the time I will need to write up new orders may deter me from attempting my new course of action. Having to continuously edit a page or two of orders will be tedious.
Third, in real life military leaders would re-act to enemy movements. If as Japan I ordered my units in Kwangtung, Manchuria, and French Indochina to attack China, but was attacked by units in Soviet Far East and India my attack would not proceed. Not only that, the Manchurian units would likely be diverted to re-inforce and/or counter-attack.