I’ve got some first-round solutions to some of the problems, but not all. Still, of course, open to feedback. These are some pretty major reworks, be warned, and pretty far out and in need of balancing.
First, the ground assumptions. All units double in hit points, flat out. This serves to lengthen battles: since firepower doesn’t increase, it will take twice as long to completely destroy the enemy. Losses won’t grow exponentially as quickly, either. Ordinarily, by the third round of combat, the difference in firepower will be greater than it was at the start of combat, and so losses will be even MORE unbalanced. The ability to take damage doesn’t change this fact at the core, it just lengthens the time: from the third round to the sixth. For the first round of combat rolls, even after losses, the firepower ratio shouldn’t change. It’ll also make average rolling more likely.
But it mostly just allows for the critical element, in my mind: reconstitution. This isn’t one of the goals I outlined earlier, not directly, but I think it is necessary. Ordinarily, units are not thrown into battle until they are used up and then replaced with newly formed units. They are reinforced as they suffer losses, which vastly reduces costs. Thus, I offer the system of reserves. Reserves are the only additional chip you would need in these house rules, unless you want a chip to indicate ground troops which have suffered a hit point lost. To be clear, the term “Reserves” is key language. Reserves cost one IPC each, move two spaces, and can be spent to rebuild any military unit which has suffered damage–including during combat. A combat unit may only be reconstituted after a full round has passed since it was damaged. Reserves have no combat value, and are destroyed if captured. They may only be used on units in their own territory. Defenders receive 2 Reserves for every IPC value of the territory they are defending if it is core, flagged territory, but these Reserves are locked in place and may not be used offensively. 4 reserves fit on a transport.
The problem of reaction. Defenders may declare a retreat before the beginning of any combat round, and then retreat to an adjacent territory after rolling. Just the same as an attacker choosing to retreat. Non-territorial Reserves may retreat, but only after two rounds of combat are conducted. Territorial (IPC based) Reserves may never retreat.
Reinforcement. Defenders may reinforce a territory under attack, or any territory adjacent to a territory under attack, from adjacent territories. Any such reinforcement must be declared before the attacker rolls for the second combat round, and is only resolved after the defender rolls in the second combat round. Only one reinforcement may be conducted per combat round. Meaning, one destination territory, from any number of adjacent contributing territories. Reserves may be moved in this manner. However, per unit moved, including Reserves, one Reserve must be spent. To reinforce a battle with three infantry, two tanks, and five reserves all from the same territory, you must have fifteen reserves available in that territory: five to be moved, plus ten to fuel all of the movement.
Multiattack. If the attacker breaks through a territory in four combat rounds or fewer, the attacker may press on with remaining units that have movement left. This is the other use of Reserves: they may be expended to boost the movement of one unit by one. Thus, tanks and mechanized could potentially move 3 spaces. Infantry could move 2.
Cities. Victory cities and capital cities have a special defensibility. If a victory city is not captured in three rounds of combat, then the attack ends for the round with a contested territory. Neither side may collect IPCs from the territory, the defender may still produce units if there is a factory present. Either side may move in reinforcements during their own turn and/or decide to press the attack. Pressing the attack results in 3 rounds of combat, resulting in victory, defeat, or continued stalemate. If reinforcements are moved in without pressing the attack, 1 round of combat is conducted.
Implications. Reserves based on territory makes defense easier, but Reserves in general makes the whole war cheaper. Assuming you play conservatively, you need never lose a tank again. 1 IPC of Reserves can repair a 6 IPC tank. Attack three infantry with five tanks, and they are very unlikely to score more than five hits, which means you lose no units. Aircraft benefit TREMENDOUSLY, since they are just SO expensive to lose ordinarily and comparatively dirt cheap to repair.
The ability to multiattack. Germans can pretty easily get REALLY far into the Soviet Union if they go for a G2 or G3 and spend all their first round money stockpiling reserves. The speed boost, again kinda cheap, means they can just fly through defenders–if they have enough firepower. So the Luftwaffe probably won’t stay in the west, since they’ll need it badly to apply the overwhelming force necessary for lightning war.
The war in the west. Reserves take up space in factories and transports. For the US and Britain, this means building up longer, and probably some shuttle runs from the East Coast to London. Gonna need a lot more transports, and that takes time. It also means that German factories are going to be running full tilt to keep the Eastern Front supplied with the Reserves it needs, so strategic bombing is going to be EXTREMELY relevant even if Germany holds Ukraine, Leningrad, and has a major in Romania.
Defensive Reserves change the German strategy a bit. In the OOB rules, Germany usually runs a pretty active defense. Allies land, you hit them back, repeat. But if Germany gets a HUGE number of free Reserves in Western Germany, the Allies are going to be encouraged to land in France, not Germany, to build up, and the Germans are going to be inclined to let them do it, unless things are going very well in the East. And Germany can hold for a while in Paris with the city rules, delaying the Allies while they beat the Russians.
Pacific. China, lacking victory cities, valuable territory, or expensive units, may not benefit much from the rules. It would generally make them more survivable, but no more able to attack the Japanese, which I like. Hong Kong is still a cheap battle, but the Japanese will need to commit to make sure it gets taken out relatively quickly and doesn’t become a multi-round debacle. Same with Philippines. The Calcutta Crush can still end India as a serious threat, but it is unlikely to actually capitulate India quickly.
In favor of the Japanese, if they commit heavily to China then they can win EXTREMELY quickly. They can also defend against the United States in their home territory even more easily than currently–high IPC value means lots of Reserves already there, plus a capital means the US can only fight three combat rounds at a time. Bear in mind that since every unit has two hit points, three rounds in these rules is one and a half OOB. So Japan could abandon the Home Islands while it presses hard on Asia, and even US focus wouldn’t really be a danger.
But, overall I think it unbalances in favor of the Allies. Since the Allies hold the majority of victory cities and the majority of territory, they will be getting the majority of Reserves and benefiting from the defensiveness of cities. The Axis will be most often on the attack, and thus benefiting from the blitzkrieg capability, but reacting out of turn really reduces the likelihood of catastrophic breakthrough. And the Allies do no small amount of attacking. If China were to ever get BACK the territories it starts without, it would quickly become indomitable. So, the Axis need to pump up their starting attributes even more: they also get a TON of starting Reserves, so they can blast through France without losing a unit, blitz China, and fight a long war in India/Russia.
Reserves retreat slowly. If Germany makes a mistake and leaves a bunch of Reserves on the front line, but miscounts how many Soviet tanks and planes can reach the territory, the USSR could potentially wipe out a lot of value. Since the defender can retreat, they probably won’t bag much of the regular German units. But with superior enough firepower, they could destroy a lot of stockpiles. Gives more strategic targets for back-and-forth in the East. And cities mean there will be definite points around which defenses coalesce, giving a shape to the war.
Additional thoughts. Could make it so that no battles may last more than six rounds–they end in a stalemate, like WWI rules, after the sixth roll. Or something like that. Not super necessary. Alternatively, could rule that major industrial facilities give the same defensive advantages as victory cities. Off the top of my head, this is relevant only in two locations: Western Germany and Northern Italy. This would be good: Axis can hold a defensive line against the West for longer while crushing the Soviets.
This is another big rule: casualties within categories. For ground battles, there are three categories: air, [mechanized+tanks], and [infantry+artillery]. Any hits achieved by a category must be assigned to the corresponding category first, then assigned to other categories if necessary. Meaning, infantry meat shields only protect artillery, and only from other infantry and artillery. You need mechanized to be meatshields for your tanks, and your planes don’t get any shielding. It would be possible to lose all of your planes in a battle first, if the enemy has a decisive air advantage, but still win the battle if you have the advantage in armor and infantry. More of a use it, lose it scenario, where the most effective and expensive units aren’t immortal. After all, whatever unit does the most engaging is going to do the most dying.
I’ve most likely forgotten some major implications or rules clarification. Going to continue to update these over time. In the future, through playtesting. Happy for feedback, hope you find this an interesting read.