Review of first draft for phase one rules

I am actually looking into the production limit. Not unlike the OOB’s production limit total number of units limited to the income number of the territory. The sugguested total number of IPCs limited to 4 times the income number of the territory is still largely abstract mean of modelling.

The now variable cost of IC is another breakthrough in realism.

There is also that thing I said earlier about imitations on WHERE IPCs can be spent and how to deal with income of isolated/blocked-off territories. (Maybe use the certain SZs representating certain convoys thingo from lend-lease solutions.)

I figure that 1/3 of UK’s income is based on sea trade so they have 30 IPC start and thats 10 IPC in sea produced income= about 3 boxes

Sounds good. A solution to my worry of collecting income from isolated regions.

But we got to be careful not to model flow of IPCs based on ideas from normal economy. 1/3 economic income or 1/3 war material (IPC)? I understand they are closely related though.

With the connected IPC idea……I understand the reasoning that ICs with connected IPCs has less reliance on sea transport but destroyed IPCs are still destroyed and should be reflected. Or not destroyed IPCs but blocked transport path, in which case maybe it can’t spend IPCs not reachable by land…but no thats bad you can transport war material via sea to a clear area and then transport by land to the IC.

The main thing I am thinking about is the flow of IPCs on the map. If we model it locally (eg. connected IPC) rather than globally we get strange situation where one can be double punished for the same thing, or punished for a path of IPC flow it did have to take.

How about we just don’t collect income from a territory totally blocked off by enemy by land+sea. But happened historically? Do production or income generation stop? Should the IPCs be stockpiled? Should it be then capturable by enemy?

1. Cannot collect IPCs from territories totally blocked off by enemy via land and sea.
2. Cannot spend IPCs on ICs totally blocked off by enemy via land and sea, except for IPCs of its own territory.

Then again, are there air convoys  :? to worry about…

Cool.
Great to see its not to radical and has been made before.
I would love it.
Hope its not too complicated when applied to the both sending (IPC generating territory) and receiving (IC territory) end.

We’ve made many changes and added many new stuff.
Are you writting it up as a standalone document or add-on for OOB or LHTR?

I mean, even our phases are different.

Back to the income issue and supply chain again…

If you don’t mind complexity I would love such details…

1. To store the IPC it must be able to go to your capital.
2. To spend the IPC it must be able to go to the IC, from capital for stored IPC or from territory for newly produced IPC.

Collect income and purchase units may need to be merged though.  :cry:

VCP = population, IPC = material, IC = production, not to be mixed up

IC only builds non-infantry units.
–-> I think cost of IC should not be dependent on VCP. Or are you are thinking VCPs means more accessable labour?

Why does IPC reduce cost of IC?
With the “4 times IPC” limit we have bigger and smaller ICs.
—> I think an IC at a territory with high IPC income should in fact cost more!

Non-infantry units still needs manpower. Tanks require crew.
But to what degree?
—> If insignificant compared to infantry units, then all is fine. If significant then VCP should affect production limit by number of units.

All ICs that were present at the start of the game are permanent (i.e. ICs that were never purchased can never be destroyed). Purchased ICs can be destroyed at the defender’s discretion when the attacker wins the battle over that territory.

Nothing is indestructible by policy or physics. USSR is happy to reduce their own cities to ground on retreat.
Recall my other rule to allow IC to be selected for destruction in purchasing units phase.

Total Victory: The winning team is the first to control every territory by the end of any US player’s turn.

You need to update the victory condition wordings in accordance to your new turn sequence (replacing with “any US player” with “any player”) or the other way around update your turn sequence to show victory condition are checked per round not turn?

Unit Placement phase:

After reading this I think you should break it up Victory City Points into Victory City Points and Population Points or something. Its getting confusing.

Commerce Raiding

No comments for commmerce raiding and connected IPCs. I highly expect to be able to convince you to switch from “local” to “global” model of the supply chain.

If you guys want to for reference I can post some ideas that Kreighund, Defiance, and I came up with for AaA Advanced over at Harris Game Design… If you are looking at multi-leveled IC’s it is the best system I have seen (the other 2 developed most of it)…

GG

Cool. Do post it, or a summary if its too long.

Producing new war units

Industrial complexes are able to produce new war units. During the purchase units phase of a turn, a player will be able to spend their production certificates into buying new units.

Besides increasing production values with the purchase of more industrial complexes, a player will need multiple complexes in a territory to enable the production of more technological advanced units. A player will need a more industrialized area to produce more advanced units.

One complex in a territory will enable the production of the following units:
• Infantry (you can change to your ruleset accordingly)
• Artillery
• Anti Aircraft Units (if included as a separate piece)
• Transport Vessels

Two complexes in a territory will enable the construction of:
• Halftracks (mechanized infantry) (if included)
• Fighters
• Dive Bombers (if included)
• Destroyers
• Submarines

Three complexes in a territory will enable the construction of:
• Armor
• Bombers
• Transport aircraft (if included)
• Cruisers
• Battleships (building it takes two turns)
• Aircraft Carriers (building it takes two turns)
• Nation specific units (if included)

A territory needs a naval port to be able to construct naval units. The naval units will be placed in an adjacent sea territory with a naval port symbol. Naval ports will also provide repairs for damaged naval vessels, and provide extra defense for the sea units in the same sea zone.

5. Industrial complexes

Each player will be able to construct Industrial complexes (IC’s) in territories they control. During the purchase units sequence of the turn, players can upgrade their economy by spending money into constructing new industrial complexes. To construct a new Industrial complex costs 8 production certificates and the player must say in which territory the industrial complex is to be placed upon building.

Unlike in former A&A editions, in Advanced A&A**(Revised Historical Varient)** it is possible to have multiple IC’s in one territory. For each IC in a territory, that territory’s production value is increased by 1. Also, a territory cannot have more industrial complexes than the production value (the IPC number printed on the map) of the territory. Also, only one IC can be constructed per turn in one territory.

For example: England has a production value of 6. So a maximum of six industrial complexes are allowed in the England territory, to give it a total of 12 production points to be received during the collect income phase.

To found a new industrial complex in a territory which doesn’t has a complex yet, it will take two turns before the complex is finished building. So for starting a new production area, it will take extra time.

In your game you will need to place chits under IC’s to represent multiples… You can also “Reduce” Factories by SBR…

GG

@Imperious:

So again we seek some basic treatment for each problem that we find in revised in a historical manner.

Yeah I think the variable IC cost is good enough.

@Imperious:

Japanese Kwangtung army: Japan gets one free infantry per turn

Only if they hold Manchuria/Manchuko.