Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Board Game Design » Board Game Design

Subject: Axis & Allies unit cost per Nation rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Erik Yacko
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Should each Nation have to pay the same amount for units? This is not Risk. Would altering the costs per country effect the game to much? Suggestions?

Thanks!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Kendall
United States
Lebanon
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I think of the "unit cost" as an aggregate in common or "international" terms for the resources and effort consumed in producing a force of comparable battlefield capability on a par with a similar force fielded by other nations.

For example, the Soviets produced 'way more T-34s alone than the Germans were able to manufacture AFVs in total. However, thirty T-34s were not a match for thirty Panthers due to doctrine, training, availability of radios for the tanks, competence of the crew in maintaining the tank, and so on.

So although the Soviets could manufacture a T-34 more inexpensively than the Germans manufactured Panthers, the Soviets needed more T-34s to match the battlefield efficiency of Panthers.

Hence, "charging" the Soviet player the same for a Tank unit as the German is appropriate since the offensive and defensive capabilities of the unit in the game are equal.

Ditto for every other piece type.

Some grounds for challenging this philosophy are bound to exist (for example, it would have taken the Soviets MORE effort to produce battleships equal to German BBs, if the Soviets wanted to for some reason), but in a game of the complexity and abstraction of A&A, I think the designer's logic holds up generally.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Thomas
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is one level up from Risk. The abstraction can be justified in terms of you are buying the same effectiveness worth of equipment.

You could also complain about the different Nations getting the same income in each territory, but the additional fiddliness is not worth it!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Yacko
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Well put. I guess changing the costs would mean changing the units also. This is a task that could be done, but would probaly require a 1d8 battleboard instead of 1d6. But its possible that this would be to complex for the fast pace gamer. It would also determine if you want to play a 3 hour game or 6 hour game. More is sometimes better depending on the player.

I am in the middle of doing research on WWII and enhancing the Avalon Hill A&A. I have gone through over 100 pages of house rules online and I even came up with a few NEW rules I haven't found to be in any of those pages yet.

I think one key factor in A&A is to get Nations to venture out more and conquer. The IPC system should be enhanced to allow upgrades per nation almost on par with playing a RTS game. This way having more money just doesn't mean your buying more Infantry for a bogged down 2 hour defence dice roll.

Avalon Hill did improve on the old school Milton Bradley game. The special abilities per Nation needs a little tweaking, but overall it works well.

I am all ears for suggestions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Philip Thomas
United Kingdom
London
London
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
There are more detailed WWII wargames out there with different national units and so on. Of course you can make do with A&A, but if you are looking for something more advanced there is plenty there.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Yacko
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Very true Philip, very true.

I wonder what this strange attraction is to A&A that gamers tend to flock to it and enhance it and still remain playing it.

I guess you can say this could be true of any game that sparks interest in someone.

I am new to this website, but hopefully i'll be able to offer my new A&A system to players that would like to test it out.

Thanks!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Frank Teplin
United States
La Mesa
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mb
Great analysis, Barry! I totally agree.
Barry Kendall wrote:
Some grounds for challenging this philosophy are bound to exist (for example, it would have taken the Soviets MORE effort to produce battleships equal to German BBs, if the Soviets wanted to for some reason), but in a game of the complexity and abstraction of A&A, I think the designer's logic holds up generally.

You could argue that this is represented in the game set-up. Has anyone EVER seen an A&A game where Russia built a battleship (or aircraft carrier, for that matter), and didn't lose horribly?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.