New Production Facilities

Probably because its based on a time frame. If you have inf with these landings then they have established a landing. Maybe both sides suck at hitting.
I like where attacking art and tanks get no 1st round attacks and attacking ships bombardment hit art and or a motorized unit first. If non then a inf.
Also when there is a landing most Inf won’t be on the beachhead. They’ll be dug in further back.

I personally like to keep with the idea of allowing each nation to have the possibility to access each of the new units, because Even Japan and Italy had some heavier tank designs and prototypes, but they just never had the production to actually put them into full production. With the research system proposed however it does accomplish your goal to an extent. Since each research would be 4 stages to progress through, if a country has no bonus to what stage they start on it can take quite a few turns and money to get some researches especially if one has to roll a 6 or a 5+ with one die to progress one stage. Italy does not have the money to spare, and Japan probably wants to spend more money on ships and taking islands and tank upgrades wont suit them unless they are trying to crush Russia. I could also add another research of mass production which the US, and probably Russia has a bonus in, and it will reduce the cost of all of their units by one IPC.

You can find some good light tank pieces on Historical Board Gaming, they are about 0.65 cents per piece

Thanks for the inputs I think I will go with the advanced mediums, and I am currently taking a look at the board to see how some of these could be included in the starting setup

@Baron:

@Narvik:

….in that case I will choose loadet Trannies…

You may just say that BB and CA can only target surface warships, this excludes TPs and Subs.

Yes, of course you can, and this will model the WWI battleships duel in a beautiful way, but the problem is that on a complex A&A Battleboard with land based Bombers, carrier fighters and Tacs, surface warships and submarines, all different types of units that would never face each other in the real war, need to be resolved in a hurry because after 20 hours of gaming your buddies need to go to work tomorrow or your wife is angry or something, or in worst case, you are out of mountain dew or something. And the Battleship on Battleship duel is not the only issue here, do remember that surface warships can only hit aircrafts on a roll of 1. And Submarines should no way be taken as fodder in a naval battle like this, since they were not designed for this but to raid unarmed Trannies and Convoys.

Well, i guess it could represent an inhabited land. I have not really thought about its representation all that much. I just thought that this was a good idea for an addition to the game. In my opinion, i guess the “houses” could represent a land that has been fortified, mechanized, or one that has a barracks? It’s all up to the player i think.

There are a lot of good ideas here that’s for sure. Some, like IL’s ideas are great theme based ideas that real capture the essence of the China theater and others, like Gar’s are great from a game play mechanic point of view. I think any of them would be an improvement to the existing state of affairs for China’s movement restrictions.

@Yavid:

why not let china place there inf. in any original chinese territory even if they don’t control them. if it’s unoccupied then they gain control, if it is occupied then combat insues as soon as the territory is attacked by an allied power or on Japan’s combat phase which ever one comes first.

I like this idea, but it would need to be controlled. Making it so that the Chinese could mobilize new units (maybe 1 or 2 infantry) in any original Chinese territory that is unoccupied might make this better, and again, a great way to represent the guerrilla and partisan warfare that was a major part of the fighting in China during WW2.

@Young:

Chinese units may move into any friendly, hostile, or neutral territory during the combat or non-combat movement phases. However, they may never enter Russian territories for any reason.

I see the thinking here, but I think its entirely to arbitrary, Japan should not have a way to “opt out” of Fighting China. I think having something in place that would want Japan to keep some portion of China under occupation (I would have thought the victory city would have been reason enough but I guess i’m just old fashioned  :| ). Placing a penalty on Japan for doing so by removing China’s movement restrictions is a good idea and giving China the ability to become more of a threat is even better.

Perhaps making it so that once China captures all of its original territories it’s movement restrictions are lifted. This was Japan will want to keep at least one Chinese territories under its control to keep them in check. However, lets up the ante here, if Japan is pushed off the Asian mainland (for sake of argument lets keep it to all non Soviet land territories) China can place an IC in Shanghai which will be their capital for the remainder of the game and can purchase units normally. This way even if China is able to move and attack where ever she wants, Japan still has a chance to push them back before China gains the ability to deliver the knock out blow to Japan.

and just to note, I would have to believe that by the time either of these instances were to happen, the game would be all but over for Japan anyway.

@Warplayer12:

i was reading the newspaper, en then i get an idea: a continental war. Every continent (Europe, Asia,Africa etc.) gets their own army and fight each other

You could get the Attack and Attack Expansion game from Eagle Games and use that for your map and forces.  You have infantry, tanks, artillery, aircraft, battleships, aircraft carriers, destroyers, and submarines.  The combat system works considerably differently from A&A, and depending on whether you use the basic games rules or the Deluxe Expansion rules, production points work differently too, along with tech development.  I prefer the original Attack Expansion, and I am running a game using a mixture of the basic game, original Expansion, and the Deluxe expansion.  Works pretty well.

And Australia in not one territory but 5.

@knp7765:

I understand where you are coming from.  Capital ships take 2 hits to sink, so they take 2 turns to build, right?  I do see the logic but I have to disagree with this idea.  Aside from Major ICs (30), Battleships (20) and Carriers (16) are already the most expensive units in the game.  Plus, if you add the planes for the carrier, 2 fighters (20), that brings Carriers up to 36, making them the most expensive units in the game.  Yeah, I know I’m talking about 3 units, but really what good is a carrier without some planes on it?
I just think they are a big enough investment in IPCs already so you shouldn’t also have to invest 2 turns to get one.

I agree with you, and yes that was what I was thinking of

there was a Historical version of Revised online for tournaments or something. 
in that version they also had rules for adding Italy, to make 6 players.

also the turn order became…

in the 1st round………
Russia, then Both Axis players (Also Italy if played) taking there turn together as one (Each phase done together),
then US & UK also taking there turn together

every round after……… the Axis (together), then the Allies (Together).

very interesting way to play. unfortunately i never got to play this version so i dont know how well it worked.  And I dont know how it would work for 1942.

I remember When they added Italy they made Germany itself worth 20 IPC’s,  Italy started with 12 and controlled Southern Europe (which was split into Italy & S. Europe), Balkans, Algieria.  there were other changes to the map as well.