GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!
17 Days Left
I was posting over in "Wargames" on BGG and A&A incomes came up.
A guy said that he tried to figure out what the incomes should be using actual production data adjusted for changes in territories controlled. He said:
1] USSR, Ger. and UK were all about right plus or minus 2.
2] Japan's income should be about 13. I had said 14.
3] USA's income should be about 58. I had said 42.
This of course would make it much harder for the Axis to win.
However, this does allow for simple variant that gets the war in the Pacific back into the game.
Add 3 IPC to the income of each US mainland terr. and the US must buy 1 ship each turn that he must place in the Pacific Ocean. This ship may not move through the Panama Canal during the next 2 turns. If he does not do this or if the ship moves through the canal then he loses the additional income for that turn (for 2 turns if he both fails to build a ship and moves another through the canal).
. . I would also give the US an IC at Hawaii at the start. It functions more like a base and gives Japan an obtainable objective in the middle of the Ocean.
The income of Japan is unchanged.
I think that this is a more acurate simulation of the over-all war. It will help Germany because the US will build other units go go with the ship he must buy. It will hurt Japan [as he should be] because the US will be fighting him in the Pacific. It will help UK & Russia in the long run because Japan's drive through India toward Moscow will be weakened.
- Last edited Mon Aug 10, 2015 1:43 am (Total Number of Edits: 1)
- Posted Sun Aug 9, 2015 2:07 pm