Do We Need Special Capitol Capture Rules? Would We Be Better Off Without Them?

In AAR, probably over 95% of all games are lost, if: when a capital is lost, and it cannot be recaptured, and the player that lost the capital is unable to capture one of the opponents capitals. Period! This seems to be the same with AA50. I don’t think Germany can keep liberating Italy and at the same time winning against Russia, but maybe axis could hold out and Jap takes Moscow. Anyway, a capital in A&A is like the queen in chess.
Also, most players concede when they think they cannot win, and most (AAR) games I played, I or the opponent have often conceded before any capital was even threatened.

I don’t think the “game ending punishment” argument is relevant in the discussion of what is good/bad with AA50.
I read the article, interesting, but A&A is a war game, not a fighting game, and changing things to make it more time to finish will not make the game any better. You have to come up with something else, even if usually, in AAR, game lasts 4-8 rnds, it can take much longer, my record in AAR is 19 rnds, was LL and multi!
If CC rules is changed then invent something else that makes a knockout possible.

IMHO, I don’t think you should lose all your money when you lose your capitol.  I think you just lose your capitol and maybe you can only collect 50% (round up) for your total income. (Neglects having to say "Well, i own W. Indies, so that’s 1 IPC, and Brazil that’s 2 IPC.  Together they are 4 IPC, so you get 2.)  Then, if you have an IC left, you can build there.

Otherwise, you have to use your cash for infantry ONLY and can only build in a territory up to that territory’s limit.  Say Brazil could build 3 Infantry…though, if you had 18 IPC worth of land to afford the 3 infantry (remember you are only getting 50%, so 50% of 18 IPC is 9 IPC) you’d probably have a better place to build them!

I think the Capital rules are fine and for all intents and purposes it should be a “game ender”.

If you nerfed the Capital rules all it would do is prolong a game that was decided long ago.  It might not matter that much for on-line play, but FTF games would just continue to drag on.  Games that you could play in a weekend would take several weekends.  And would the Rus/Ger player really want to keep continuing to play for the 10-20% chance (with new captial rules) they can come back from losing the capital or would they rather just start up a new game the next weekend where they theoretically have a 50% chance to win?

I’ve been on both the winning and losing end of plenty of 25-30 rd games in both 2nd Ed and Revised where a capital finally falls, but I’ve known the game was pretty much decided by rd 15-20.
There are also strategies that deal with vacating Capitals to protect your army (stack).  The problem is many players leave their stacks in the Capital to get wiped out leaving nothing left, thus the Capital falls and the game ends.

Also usually when Germany or Moscow get captured, not much is plundered.  Germany at most should probably be down 10-16 ipc and Russia probably only has 8-12 ipc. 
It is not like it is easy to take Berlin when they earn 40.

I’ve been on both the winning and losing end of plenty of 25-30 rd games in both 2nd Ed and Revised where a capital finally falls, but I’ve known the game was pretty much decided by rd 15-20.

I feel the same way about this too.  That’s why I’ve also adopted a 12 VC condition, to make sure the game doesn’t have to be prolonged unnecessarily through player frustration and stubbornness.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=12895.0

Honestly, almost everyone quits once they lose a capitol.  Rarely do players even keep playing after a capitol falls and when they do, it’s probably because they are taking a capitol as well that same round.

However, I can see a few circumstances when the fall of Germany not being a “game ender” could be a good thing.  Why shouldn’t Germany be allowed to recover?  If they can do it, and it could very well be that the allies have to absolutely destroy their entire army and air force getting Berlin meaning Germany CAN liberate with a mere 3 infantry possibly.

What pisses me off is when the allies throw a hail mary and run for a 9 VC game because they cannot take Berlin or Tokyo.  Meanwhile, the axis are playing a long term strategy to really win by taking out Moscow and London or something. (Feel free to reverse for the Axis running for a 9 VC win instead if you want.)

My thoughts:

First of all, I don’t believe Moscow falling should mean the death of Russia.  The soviets would have relocated, hence the whole “Mobile Industry” advantage in AAR, which made no sense since you would be moving your complex East of Moscow and thus lose it, being unable to produce anything…

Second, lucky grabs are lame.  Making a 50/50 or so assault against a capital can decide a game, and I personally don’t think it should.  The IPCs aren’t destroyed, they are STOLEN.  For making a lucky grab against a single territory, a player could be rewarded a good 50 IPCs or so.  This situation IS rare, but still, putting so much emphasis on a single territory explains why we don’t see these “global wars” develop.

Finally, I think defeating a nation should be final.  Germany shouldn’t stop fighting because Berlin has fallen, but because every single area in Europe has fallen.  America shouldn’t surrender if Washington DC is captured, they should surrender when every single mile of American soil is under seige and no soldiers remain.  You get what I’m saying.

So yeah, I’m all for trying a few games without special capital capture rules.  In fact, I may add that to my little house rule list.  Thanks for the idea!

@Rakeman:

Finally, I think defeating a nation should be final.  Germany shouldn’t stop fighting because Berlin has fallen, but because every single area in Europe has fallen.  America shouldn’t surrender if Washington DC is captured, they should surrender when every single mile of American soil is under seige and no soldiers remain.

In real life, Germany surrendered when they still holded Norway, Denmark and some zones of Netherlands and Austria. A country don’t fight until the very soldier is killed, they fight until there is no chance of even get a conditional surrendering.

Germany, Japan and Italy should surrender when their capital falls, at least as the game is now. Allies are another thing, because UK would continue fighting from colonies, USA would fight from West coast and soviets from Siberia. I’m pretty sure even commie China would continue the fight, rallying the warlords, even if Koumingtang’s capital of Chongquing were taken.

Still, I agree that capital rules as now are too hard. It would be nice having a rule for exiled goverments, even if you steal all the money the turn you conquer the capital

@Cmdr:

Honestly, almost everyone quits once they lose a capitol.

Even Moscow, with the UK and USA just a turn away from liberating it?

IL mentioned elsewhere that it’s common to see 4 nations hold Moscow on a single turn (though I’ve never seen all 5 it’s a possibility - or maybe even 6 now.)

I’ve been in too many games of Revised dominated by the taking and re-taking of Moscow to have anything but contempts for the traditional CTC rules.
If Moscow fall, Russia fights on from the Urals, the UK from Canada and so on. The game should not be all about just 6 territories.
As long as a nation has an IC it should be able to produce units there. And even without one it should still be able to place infantry in home territories.

Remember that a capital manages infrastructure and IPC’s are representative of production and infrastructure. Even in war soldiers are paid as are the people who build their weapons. If Washington fell tomorrow how many of us can just get together with the nieghbors and build a tank? Not to mention the only thing of yours that would have value is hard goods and equipment. I f the Chinese invaded tomorrow do you think Canadians or Mexicans would except US dollars for guns?

That’s why I think the money should go back to the bank, or as cruel twist of fate, the assests are frozen and given to the loser’s allies as if they were a government in exile.