Fortunes of Victory - New Cards

Oh, I will go back and take a look.

Going to be out of touch for a few days. Will review when able.

First off, I think your cards require some amount of background information on rules and map you intend to use.

Secondly, even though these responses may appear critical, I do not mean to come off as completely condemning. I tend to point out holes or questions that immediately come to mind.

Third, to help others understand my comments or participate, you may want to repost your cards as images embedded in the thread. Will just make it a bit easier.

Fourth, I am going to address only the ones I attached as files earlier in the thread.

Auxiliary Cruisers
Purely as a card, I like this one. It is beautifully underpowered, if I may describe it so. In a big ocean, with isolated transports this would be kinda cool. Unfortunately in A&A, that rarely, if ever, happens. It may actually be too underpowered for its own good (A1 D1). To increase utility a bit, I might bump that up to A2 D1.
Also the name is a little misleading for how weak the ship is. This should probably be called an Aux Destroyer or Destroyer Escort rather than Cruiser. If this is a Germany only card, it might be better to call it a Commerce Raider.
I like the Withdraw and False Flag special abilities. Neutral Ports basically ensures that the ship will always get to move 3 because of how many neutral countries are on the board. Although 3 specials for one unit may be a bit much.
In the grand scheme of things, this ship will likely be utterly insignificant if there are only one of these on the board.

Deutsches Afrika Korps
Attack and defense are high for a mechanized unit (A2 D3). By attacking at +1 first round of combat do you mean rnd 1 attack is 3?
Why is move only 1 for a mechanized unit?
Tripoli is not even denoted on the G40 map? Are you using different territories?
The name Deutsches Afrika Korps for a single unit seems a little inappropriate. Other than the unit being playable in Africa, I do not understand the name of an entire expeditionary army being used for a single unit.

General “Vinegar Joe” Stillwell
Is this a one-time use card or does it count for the whole game? If for the whole game then it is pretty significant. Also, I am not partial to “leader” type cards, but that is a personal preference.

King’s African Rifles
Again, I do not mind this card. It is probably a good representation of native troops (A1 D1) versus normal army infantry (A1 D2). How do you intend to distinguish this unit from others? As with the Aux. Cruiser, this will likely be insignificant in the grand scheme. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Legion Entrengere
Is this the French Foreign Legion? This is a good card. These infantry are the same as regular infantry. It is one time only. Defending at 3 during first rnd of combat is pretty powerful.

Salvage Operations
Interesting card. I assume this can be used for anyone. Looks exactly like the Soviet NA from Revised “Salvage” except that it is you get one if you lose one rather than you get one if you kill one.

Torpedo Squadron
This one is a little odd. First, it is a downgrade from a regular tactical bomber: Defense 2, Move 1?! By “Attack 3 (Naval units only)” I am assuming you are relegating this unit to only attacking ships. You are also implying that you have dedicated naval and land based planes.

Undersea Cruisers
I don’t really get this one. It is a cruiser but counts as a submarine? It has better attack and defense values (A3 D2) than a sub.
Floatplane:  “May re-roll one attack die during first round of combat.”… This sounds rather redundant since you only get one roll during the first round of combat.

If I have time, I will go back to the google drive and look the others over. However, as I said, it would be much easier for me and others to participate in the discussion if you just embedded the cards here. Or even attached them to posts, something you should have privileges to do by now.

It is difficult for me to give you accurate feedback on the cards without a more defined scope of the game you intend for them to be used in. My impression is that this game or board does not truly exist yet, since you like the GW39 map but would like a bigger one. That is not wrong, it just poses problems because it can be difficult to evaluate individual unit or card value if you don’t know what they will be played on… or, more importantly, the rule set used. I am not saying you must define this completely, it just appears that your scale is much grander than G40 and some of the unit characteristics are different.

All that said, there are elements here that I do like and others that don’t really fit my tastes.

Salvage may be a ripoff, but it is a good and simple little advantage. I would impose some more qualifiers to the card though. Only in one territory per round, only so many times a game… something like that. Unless you intend for it to be unlimited, which may become kinda ridiculous. Like a self-regenerating army.

The French Foreign Legion is also simple and readily implemented. Gives France a minute amount of added purpose and puts a few pebbles in the way of the Axis advance.

You are correct about the Afrika Korps unit name.

The Torpedo Squadron card name just seems kind of generic. Do you intend that there will be more than one of these cards? Or that it is usable by multiple Powers?

@Trenacker:

And yes, the first thing to do probably would be to design a new map. Do you know of anybody who is interested in that sort of thing? I’m afraid I wouldn’t know where to start.

A lot of people here modify existing maps like G40 and earlier ones, but those keep essentially the same size and number of territories, so I doubt it would suit your purposes.

I am very interested in re-drawing a map and in fact have already begun. I am not satisfied with G40 OOB map as I would like many of the territories revised and a slightly larger size. I like the HBG Global War 39 map; size is better and territories are better, but it still has flaws (for my purposes). I am not completely confident in HBGs GW39 2nd Ed. map yet either, though the design has improved.

Anyway, I have blown up a picture of the GW39 map and have been tracing out the territories and sea zones so I have a base from which to modify things. I am still early in the process. I imagine the end size will be the same as HBGs large map 47" x 96"… although I am considering revising the aspect ratio so that certain landforms are not so distorted.

@Trenacker:

Basically, the player plays X IPC’s to play a card from their hand. If it’s a unit, that unit is placed during the deployment phase. If it is an action like Salvage, they get to do that once, unless otherwise specified. I have tried to cost out everything appropriately.

I see. I didn’t know there was a cost to play the card. Did you say how cards are collected? Are they just one per turn or do you get them after completing objectives? I hope you don’t have to buy them, because it would be less worthwhile if you have to pay for the card and then pay again to use it.

@Trenacker:

I think the key to modding A&A is that, no matter the design, you need to stay true to why people play this particular game.

First, they want to move little plastic men and roll dice. If there are chits, they must not represent units.

Second, they want to engage in at least a partial historical simulation. There’s a reason the game is “Axis & Allies,” not “Guys & Tanks.”

Third, they want to play a game of minimum complexity.

I am of the opinion that, for somebody who plays A&A, the question of how long is less important than how exhausting.

Any map I participated in designing would be larger than the original. It would also include a number of magnified “cut-outs” around the borders for those territories that tend to be jam-packed with units.

I completely agree on all your points. Simplicity is fundamentally important. The challenge for me becomes improving existing game mechanics without really adding a whole lot of unnecessary bits. My intention is to leave A&A traditional elements, phases and pieces exactly as they are, but to modify rules for the pieces, add to the map and re-shape the victory conditions. This should not alter the game itself at all, just allow for different approaches when playing.

@Trenacker:

I know a great mapmaker. Maybe we can dragoon him.

Haha, that would be excellent. I am good with maps, but I do not have any true image editing software at this time. I hear there is a free Photoshop-like program you can download though.

@Trenacker:

I think that new core gameplay mechanics can be added. They will succeed if they avoid infringing upon any of the core reasons that people play A&A.

For example, I think that it might be possible to add a Political Influence tracker that affects the behavior of neutrals (here, I am using that term broadly, to include countries such as Argentina, Spain, Finland, Romania, and Siam). The Political Influence tracker can be packaged as a separate play aid placed to one side of the map, or else printed somewhere on the edges of the map itself. This would be one use for chits.

I think that major railroads should be printed on the map. Plastic markers can be used to indicate when a rail line is either cut or extended.

Weather effects can be added for specific regions on the board. Possibly, players could roll before any naval engagement while the fleets do a “search.” Carriers might lend bonuses to find the enemy, representing their air groups.

All of this sounds cool and would work with a large map, but it definitely adds complexity to an already complex game. There are a lot of rules and phases in the OOB game, which can be intimidating enough for a new player. Your propositions would significantly slow gameplay and add multiple new layers of politics, logistics and tactics.

I briefly considered how railroads could be implemented, but then figured it would probably make mechanized units obsolete. The only railroad I would include is a line on the map for the Trans-Siberian RR.

Dude… you have got to check out HBGs new Global War series. I am just finding out a lot about this myself. The Global War 1936-1945 game is supposed to be released next month.

This gets into almost all the stuff you just mentioned. The games are going to start in 1850 and move all the way up through 2025. The board is huge (bigger than G40) and full of more intricate elements including the possibility for the CSA. I think your game may already be here.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30805.msg1458230#new
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36323.15

http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Global-War-1936-1945-Variant-Map-PREORDER_p_2029.html?mc_cid=5adafb82dc&mc_eid=e2bfc39772
http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Proposed-Games_c_550.html