My group played this version three times.  The last time we tried to improve the pacing of the game by allowing rail movement.  It didn’t really fix the core problem with pacing (IMO), which is a function of having 8 turns per round, but did allow reinforcing troops to actually get to the front (instead of taking multiple years to get across their own land, which didn’t really make sense to me).

Strategic Movement:  Non-combat troop movement through any contiguous territories owned by you (not allies).  SM cannot be used by troops in contested zones (regular 1-zone movement would apply) nor can troops be moved into contested zones using SM.  For historical logistic purposes, SM is banned in Africa, Arabia, Persia and Afghanistan, which places had no modern transport networks.

Hi, Taamvan.  thanks for the comments.

Sorry, the values are all 4 IPCs for National Objectives.  The NOs came from Argothair, but with some tweaks by our group (I think originally came from a different A&A version).  More money on the board makes the game a little more fun, but in theory it should last longer (which is not desirable), but I feel like we get to the climactic battles faster than we would with minuses…

I do feel like the board is still tilted for the Axis, but Russia having an extra 8 IPCs per turn is a bigger impact than Germany having an extra 8 IPCs.  We maybe could nerf the values down for the Axis, maybe.  I feel like the paratroop rules and the Russian fighter conversion support the Allies.  We’re trying to steady the board without tilting it to the Allies; and meanwhile trying to make some other strategies playable.

We have a play group that can usually get together 4 or 5 people for 1942.2 every few months.  We’re not experts like most of the pros on here, but middle level players.

As everyone knows, the game OOB is unbalanced towards the Axis; Russia is not really fun to play in a 5 man match; and the Pacific gets largely ignored.  I see there’s a 1942.3 rule mods, but we’ve been gradually refining our own mods.  To shake things up, we added in the National Objectives (borrowed from Argothair), which made the game less predictable and got some more money on the board, which is fun.  We’ve tweaked the NOs a bit as we’ve used them, and we have recently added in Paratroopers and a mechanic for Russia to convert Western allied fighters to Russian Fighters (which give them a lot more to play with in deadzoning) for 3 IPCs (sort of a Lend-Lease deal).

Bombers can drop one INF unit in combat, but only in support of amphibious assaults or ground assaults.  First time we added in Paratroopers, they were just doing annoying unsupported drops all over Europe, which was sort of gamey, and ahistorical that the Allies would just paratroop guys deep into German territory to be killed the next turn.  We did allow for unsupported paratroop drops onto islands (not Japan or Britain), in order to activate the Pacific somewhat.  With the Japanese and American NOs in the Pacific we were trying to make it so their was more opportunity and incentive to island-hop.  We also made Bombers able to drop 2 INF in non-combat, so there would be a little bit more depth.  It was used by the US to reinforce Egypt from Gibraltar on US2, after Germany got diced in the G1 attack.

Anyway, we’ve played one game with this full set of rules.  It was fun and seemed good for playability, but it is hard to tell from a sample set of one.  The Allies went KJF, even after an unsuccessful SZ 37 attack, and a G1 naval build that got sunk on UK1, so that was a strange move to me.  I was Japan and just doing the India crush until the US fleet (weaker fleet on the water, but supported by 5 bombers, with another 4 imminent) moved within two spaces of my main fleet, and I sunk the US fleet and the 9 bomber counter attack with some lucky dice.  So hard to tell how a more normal game would go.

Anyway, I would love to hear some feedback, or maybe rules that appear too exploitable, or some suggestions for further improvements.

House Rules Summary

1. Red Bomber
   ∙ USSR starts the game with a bomber in Moscow

2. Russian Fighters (Purchase and Place Units Phases - USSR Only)
   ∙ During the USSR’s ‘Purchase Units’ phase, for 3 IPCs they may remove 1 Allied fighter from the board if that fighter is located in an original USSR territory.  The fighter is returned to the Allied player’s unit pool and a USSR fighter is placed in the mobilization zone along with their other purchased units.
   ∙ During the USSR’s “Mobilize New Units” phase, the fighter purchased for 3 IPCs is placed in the territory that contained the Allied fighter at the beginning of the USSR’s turn.

3. Paratroopers (Combat Phase - Any Faction)
   ∙ Paratroopers occur in combat phase
   ∙ Each bomber tasked to transport paratroopers into combat can move one infantry provided they both start the turn in the same zone.
   ∙ Paratroopers can be used in one of two situations:
   i) in support of a combat movement involving other ground units, including amphibious assaults 
   ii) independent combat on a 1 zone island (e.g. Australia doesn’t count as it is 2 zones);  CANNOT be used on Japan or Britain; BB and CA can provide bombardment support

4. Air Transport (Non-Combat Phase - Any Faction)
   ∙ Air Transport can be used in the non-combat phase
   ∙ Each bomber assigned to air transport can move two infantry provided they both start the turn in the same zone.  Infantry can be air transported into territories captured during the player’s combat phase.  Normal movement rules for bombers apply.
   ∙ Bombers that have been previously used in the combat phase cannot be used for air transport
   ∙ Alternate rule for consideration if the above is found to unbalance the game:  Infantry can only be air lefted into territory controled by the faction at the beginning of their turn (i.e. cannot land in territory captured during the combat phase).

5. Victory Conditions
   ∙ Victory is achieved when one side concedes defeat or the consensus when the game is ended due to time.  Victory cities count for NOTHING!

National Objectives
  USSR
“Lend-Lease Support: Allies control Archangel, and Sea Zones 3, 4, and 6 are clear of Axis submarines.”
"Trans-Siberian Railroad: Allies control at least 3 contiguous territories of Novosibirsk, Evenki, Yakut, and Buryatia.  "

GERMANY
“Scandinavian Iron Ore: Axis have at least 1 unit in Norway.”
“Eastern Oil Supplies: Axis control at least 3 of Egypt, Trans-Jordan, Persia, and Caucasus.”
“Mare Nostrum: Allies have no ships in Sea Zones 14 through 17 (Mediterranean and Black Sea).”

UNITED KINGDOM
“Mediterranean Campaign: Britain has at least one unit in Algeria, Italy, or Southern Europe.”
“Commonwealth Brigades: Allies controls at least 3 of India, South Africa, Eastern Australia, and Eastern Canada.”

JAPAN
“Chinese Hegemony: Allies have no units in Sinkiang, Anhwei, Szechuan, Yunnan, Kwangtung, Kiangsu, and Manchuria.”
“Secure Oil Routes: Japan has at least one unit in at least 3 of Borneo, New Guinea, Solomon Islands, and Caroline Islands.”
“Non-Aggression Pact: Russians have no units in orange territories, and Japanese have no units in red territories.”

USA
“Pacific Island Bases: Allies control at least 3 of Iwo Jima, Wake Island, Hawaii, and Midway.”
“Liberation Army: Americans have at least one unit in France, Northwest Europe, or Italy.”

I played another game with India at 5, but I played against myself instead of the AI (first time doing that!).

Russia got absolutely diced in the heavy Ukraine strafe, and so West Russia was abandoned R2 and with no fighter support (Iceland gone G1, no other good routes) Germany rolled over them on turn G5.

Once the fighter route was gone I went heavy tanks in India, hoping to swing out against the Japanese and provide defence for Moscow.  I did have 8 UK tanks about to rush in to Moscow for defence (on UK6), but that would have exposed India on J6 AND Japanese tanks were closing in on Moscow as well, so it would have been a 1 or 2 turn delay at most.  Japan had the luxury of building a factory in Manchuria for north route tanks and just stacking Yunnan with art and inf (with their fleet in the adjacent SZ) and deadzone Burma, so the UK troop buildup in India couldn’t really pivot out of India as much as I thought.  Any foray out of India, and the 5 IPC factory would be gone, so the two armies stayed in the gravitational pull of one another.

I’ve never really done a KJF, but I think that might work a lot better with 5 IPC India.  I might read some KJF strategies and try it out.  So far, 5 IPC India is a failure, haha.

@Black_Elk:

Yeah I’m like you, I’d always empty Karelia. Though sometimes my main opponent will leave a single dude behind to be annoying. Trying to pull a fighter out of position or keep the cruiser in place for an air strike with the optimal air route. Probably because he knows I like to spend the absolute minimum on Karelia for G1. Prefer to save max hitpoints for the second round.

Even if he leaves it empty, which is the better play in my view, sometimes I’ll stay in sz5 anyway just to transport into Baltic or Finland for G2 and take a 50/50 to nab a fighter when the obvious air strike comes. I’m not usually trying to push heavy until G3 anyway hehe. Taamvan’s situation is different though, his German opponent seems kind of crazy on the attack. I’m more conservative with the Luftwaffe.

I like sz 8 for the cruiser and Iceland on the sacrifice play with 1 dude, because it’s a pretty nice distraction for the Allies. It always seems to p�ss him off, so I like that psych warfare aspect haha.

It occurs to me now that I didn’t really discuss the sz5 transport in the Germany thread I started a while back. http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35951.0

Mentioned the cruiser play, but Iceland is a pretty good one. It should get a mention.
Alas I never finished that series. Had planned to write something for Japan and the other 2 Allies but never got around to it, just general mentions in the 1942.2 overall strategy doc. But the nation focused guides are probably easier to frame. Will have to take another crack at it sometime.

Yeah, I agree with your second paragraph, in general.  But the Iceland play works great if you have US player that likes to transit fighters to Russia, because once West Russia looks dicey the well dries up.  Nice to mix it up, and I never really expect the transport to live to G2 anyway.

I’ve read and re-read your Russian and German openers threads a lot.  I’d like a Japan one if you ever get the time, but I feel like Japan has the most flexibility their first turn based on whatever UK did and their general multitude of options (other than Pearl Light, which seems to be pretty optimal), so it may be a LOT of writing, haha.  I’d also like a UK one, because your insistence on sinking the SZ61 transport with a fighter and a cruiser is something I would not have come up with.

@Black_Elk:

I don’t know, I think the cruiser to sz7 is a bit overkill. Pretty easy to get the job done with 2 subs and 2 fighters.

Then you can send the cruiser to sz8 to cause the British headaches with their fighter transits to W. Russia or Arch. Or you can leave it in the Baltic to defend the transport, grab a bombardment for Karelia, and maybe pick off a British fighter on UK1.

Karelia is usually vacated when I play, so a bombard is not necessary.  Plus Baltic is a fly over for the UK fighters, so they can still transit to WR on UK1.

Cruiser in SZ8 accomplishes the same deal (though smarter) as what I said - screwing with the fighter transit to WR on UK1.  For an aggressive German player like Taamvan faces, it sounds like early fighter support to West Russia is critical, so this would muck with that plan.  Combine cruiser to SZ8 and a juicy undefended German transport taking Iceland G1, and the German player could make it difficult to prioritize and transit fighters to Russia in the early game.

@Argothair:

UK1: fly 2 starting fighters from London to West Russia, build 2 new fighters

Assuming G1 sinks the Royal navy (with the cruiser+), and the German cruiser is left, how do you deal with it?  If you send one or both fighters then they can’t make it to WR?  Or do you send in the DD from Canada with the Bomber?  I usually send that combo (DD/Bomber) to sink the 2 German subs off E USA, with the two UK fighters to clear the cruiser.  Do you leave any German ships alone?

Personally, I don’t like the Ukraine strafe because when it goes sour for me it is tough to regain position in Russia. Â

I haven’t had a problem with the West Russia stack.  Getting diced absolutely sucks, but if you keep floating these odds (with or without the strafe into Ukraine) in games you will end up with way more games where you crush his attacking stack and maintain a lot of your stack, and really limit his ability to do anything else on the front.  And on UK1 or UK 2 fighter support should start flowing in and that really tips the balance.

One other possibility - Are you absolutely sure your opponent is bringing everything legally?  Not that he’s cheating, but we’ve all made errors in how far a unit can travel, and maybe he’s bringing units that can’t quite make it to the fight?  I’ve played guys who insist a move is legal because they always do it, but when we count it out it doesn’t actually work.

Per fighters to Africa - even when West Russia is taken, unless Iceland was grabbed G1 it should still be a 2-move route to Moscow from London.

@Argothair:

I think a 5 IPC India could protect itself from Japan, but at what cost? 15+ IPCs per turn to India leaves Britain without the funds to build a serious Atlantic fleet. You might build one destroyer and fill one transport in the Atlantic each turn, or you might not even manage that, if you want any British air support for India or Russia. It becomes very easy for Germany to ward off your tiny fleet with even one German fighter purchase per turn, so Germany will probably get huge, and eventually India gets attacked from both sides, by Germany and Japan.

If the UK abandons a 5 IPC India factory, then Japan can singlehandedly out produce the Caucasus, without the need to build any new factories of its own.

I agree that Britain needs more starting production slots, but I’d rather accomplish that with extra starting factories in South Africa, Australia, and/or Canada.

@Black_Elk:

I think the issue with India is that it’s just more production than the British economy can really handle, even at just 3. Although if it was 5, there is good chance they could hold it long enough to have an impact. The question then becomes, what do you do with it? 5 tanks a turn? Hold it for like 4 turns and then bounce, sending 20 tanks to the Eastern front? Stick it out with 5 artillery and a fighter in UK? It’d pretty much be the only game in town, Japan would have to go south I’d think, or give up on the center. I don’t know it might work actually. But the game would still be pretty one dimensional for UK. It’d be an even bigger magnet at 5 than it is at 3.

Good comments. � I did manage to figure out how to edit the 5 IPC India, and played one game as Allies and one as Axis against Hard AI (no bonuses, but did also use the Red bomber bid game 1 and AI used the 12 IPCs for Russian ground). �

In the first game AI Japan built a factory in Manchuria, but didn’t build up their fleet much (and they never do Pearl) so I hit them with the starting US fleet from Hawaii and the east coast (at 45% odds) and wiped out their fleet. They turtled and were overrun in Asia so it was an easy Allied victory. I was dropping 5 ground in the UK and 1 fighter in London for Moscow support, but Germany never made a real play for Moscow, just played cat and mouse with Russia.

Second game I was Axis, and UK dropped 5 inf in India first turn, which was daunting for Japan. � However, the US transport and destroyer survived G1, so US went Atlantic fleet heavy and UK followed suit, and left India to rot. � Germany was mostly playing defence for the rest of the game, and once Japan had India the Orange monster was in full swing. � Moscow fell after Germany’s main stack peeled all the ground and Japanese tanks rolled in, which is fairly standard when you ignore Japan completely. �  �

The 5 IPC India definitely means the UK has to drop some more IPCs away from Europe, but I feel like this makes a KJF strategy a lot more plausible, since Japan can’t compete on the ground with UK and on the water with US. � Kick Japan off of Asia and then pivot the ground troops to Moscow. �

In a KGF the UK has to balance between the Atlantic and the Pacific, but Japan has to focus resources more on taking India (if dropping even 5 inf per turn) it delays the center crush, and keeps Japan from being the Orange Monster early on. And since they get 2 bonus IPCs per turn and to starting income, some of the costs of stacking extra infantry are mitigated.  � If Japan is distracted, the extra Indian units can pivot towards Africa or Moscow, and provide relief in those areas. �

It is hard for me to gauge how realistic this is from just playing the AI, but those are my thoughts. � A good human opponent may make way more hay with Germany with some of the pressure off in the Atlantic.

I’m interested to hear how your face to face A0 games goes. � What bid are you thinking for the Axis?

Cool to read about the different style with turn A0.  Also cool to see that the vets still make errors… not just me!  Definitely want to read more if you keep playtesting.  Originally I was against the +42 bid + saved Allied TUV + destroyed Axis TUV as way overkill for balance (I thought non-com only might be enough), but an Axis bid would keep it interesting.

I would like to try my proposed 4 or 5 IPC value India, but I’m not sure how to modify the game like that.  I’m also more green than you guys (by several hundred games, apparently) so I’m not sure how well my playtesting against the AI would be as validation.