Many play with some form of varient with tech. For a few they played that you had to trigger the siberian transfer. For awhile a limit on air was very popular and many still play with that. Many have played with different options over time. You're all too entrenched in the standard rules Most likely somewhat true, but not totally. I hope SC2 addresses some of my concerns, but in case anybody wants to kill some time trying out these rules, i'm game.
I don't know about you, but the 'standard' rules stopped doing it for me after the 20th time of seeing the same repeated Axis moves. You're all too entrenched in the standard rules. What SHOULD constitute a REAL victory is defeating russia on his home turf, while fending off/defeating major invasions by the western allies.īah, why do I waste my time. The axis should be in a race against time, not the allies! But that's what every axis player does, try to conquer every little bit and then once we've gotten our mpp level past the allies, we like to waste time sitting around waiting for tech and hammering poor UK's little RAF into the ground. It just makes it that much harder for the axis, not impossible, but harder. Tell me, which of these rules I made is 'not fair'? None of them. That's ridiculous! You should have had house rules like this a looooooong time ago. Malta's useless (not so with these rules). I hate it, I think it's childish, but we all do it. Terif is a master at using little corps to run around and 'block' ships from escaping, and annoying you. BORING, and it's always the same cookie-cutter strategy. No, USA/USSR don't mind at all, at least not for another year. Yes, invade Sweden, Spain, Vichy, Middle East, Balkans, whole Europe. Everyone is always afraid to play something different, and for 2-3 years you all play the same 1939 scenario. This would certainly be more of a challenge for the Axis. I'm looking at you Terif/Zapp/Rambo/Kuni/Anyone This is not a scenario, and should be played as the standard 39 campaign.Īnybody want to play a game with these rules? I would love to try them.
I think games will be more realistic, more fun, and Axis will have (in general) more of an uphill fight, like it should be. Now you can only get so much higher than another country in tech, limiting some of the controversy. Tech will still have an effect, but less so, with more realistism emphasized. These rules represent a more historical approach to WW2, and limit actions of players to historically 'acceptable' scenarios. No other restrictions for USA, except Tech.īid rules are still undecided. No USSR pieces allowed west of Suez Canal. No UK/US Armies or Air allowed on East Front. USSR may not have more than 3 tranports active in Black Sea at one time. USSR may not have more than 3 tranports in Baltic at one time. USSR may only invade Sweden if it is Axis held.
USSR may not advance more than 3 hexes into Finnish territory until 1943. UK may only have 5 tranports at sea at one time (including transit through Suez) LC/Italian Gambit not allowed by Allies. Portugal may be invaded by Allies only starting from 1943. Germany may only have maximum of 2 air units in Africa, and only 1 land unit (not incl. After this period, an occupation of Moscow is required to invade UK. Axis may only land troops on UK soil in 1940/41. Malta may not be taken, only a forced evacuation and port damage (eg. Italy may not research AT (not even to L1) Sweden may not be invaded until at war with Russia. Vichy France may not be invaded until 1942 Note: Not only do these represent historical restrictions on respective countries' landing craft availability, they also counteract many controversial tactics. Italy is restricted to 2 transports in Med at the same time. Any direct tranporting (eg Kiel -> Oslo) are not included in these restrictions, only transports that stay at sea for 1 or more turns. Germany is limited to 5 transports in Atlantic areas (everything west of Gib), and 1 in Med area. After this level is reached, chits must be reclaimed. No Tech level may reach more than Lvl 2 in ANY field, except Rockets.
0 kommentar(er)
