AAP/AAE Linking Rules?

[NimitsTexan]

Did AH ever come up with any official (or semi-official) and workable rules to linke AAP and AAE?

[DY]

Yeah but they were a total rush job and sucked. I think there is a link on "Thrasher's Axis and Allies Homepage" (just GOOGLE 'Thrasher + Axis' to find)

I have a tidy little ruleset that I adapted. Unfortunately it takes a long time and since revised came out none of my group will play the linked boards.

[Lobo]

DY,
I have not had a chance to try the linked rules from trasher's site yet (AAR made them less attractive), what are their basic problems?

Did you develop your linked ruleset from scratch or use the AH linked rules as a starting point? What kind of changes did you make?

[DY]

No I adapted my rules from what i found to be the best of the 3 or 4 "house-rule sets" I found at Thrashers (I have credited the creator at the bottom of the last page of my rules). I found there were a few major issues, like the USA being able to spend around $81 a turn all against Germany, so I instituted a rule to limit the USA and UK from spending max 75% of their income on each map per turn.

The AH rules had Japan in the war from the first turn which is ahistorical and bad for the game. It also gave USA an income of 115 which could be spent entirely against Germany (that is crazy the Axis will lose very quickly).

The income generated from West USA is reduced in my ruleset, which makes for a more balanced game. There is also a Russo-Japanese treaty in effect which can be broken under certain circumstances.

The AH rules are unplayable, period.

[series]

I was actually working on an "advanced" axis and allies scenario in which both boards are used and there are many new rules and etc (such as 30 weapons to develop including new units). However, i am having trouble finding realistic 1939 setup ideas.

[DY]

Actually the linked boards makes for a really good game, if you can spare a few days.
You definitely need to double the cost of tech, because there is so much more money on the combined boards than there is in MB AA or AH AA.

The victories don't feel as "cheap" as a german stack or a J7 22 VP win.

[elbowmaster]

butler made a nice version / he changed the europe map...his map is on my site, and his rules are located at thrashers and also don raes site...

also on my site, there is the interlink board made by rob davau, the MS of pacific...as well as at don's the thread that contains the discussions...

it never went anywhere unfortunately, rob seems to have vanished...

kinda sad the ball was dropped on those "linking" game, afterall, it was supposed to be a linked game eventually...

oh well...another AH moment...

-cheers

-elbowmaster

[DY]

Actually I remember downloading those interlink territorries a long time ago. That edition did show some promise from what I remember of the .pdf (I never got around to printing it).

[DY]

If anyone tries my rules or at least reads them and has a bit of a think, please PM me with any suggested improvements. I was thinking of creating a faster game using VPs for the Axis as an alternative to the "capture two capitals or achieve economic victory" conditions. You'd decide before the game if you were playing for VPs or playing for "major victory" to coin a phrase from AH AAR.

[Maestro]

I've played the linked rules several times now, and there is a lot of confusion with the technical way to play. However, the game itself is incredibly fun - all the more so because it is an accurate picture of how stacked the odds are against the Axis.

[DY]

The linked rules that I put up on this page? Or the official Avalhon Hill draft linking rules?

[Caractacus]

It's fun to play a linked game, but you HAVE to change the IPC values on one of the boards because though the ratio works well between countries on each board, they cannot be compared across boards.

As it stands, Australia as a country would have a good chance of defeating the UK as a country (no convoys). This is nonsense. The population and industrial production figures can't be allow the IPC totals to be considered equal.

It also suggests that West Coast USA would outproduce the East and Mid-West...

If you play the linked boards game as it stands just for the hell of it, that's fine - but if you want any kind of reflection of reality, things must change. If not, it's best to build on the Pacific board where everything is cheap relative to the Europe one, and then move across to Europe. Australia outproduces Czechoslovakia several times.

Perhaps of even greater immediate effect is the set-up. The Europe set-up sort of has one Inf representing something like 4-5 infantry divisions. Pacific seems to almost encourage a 1:1 ratio for the Burma area Japanese and Indian British, but a MUCH lower one for Chinese troops. If you allow for the fact that the Chinese are under-represented to indicate their relative impotence, you are left with a situation where, if the British move Inf pieces from India (Pac) to the Middle-East (Eur), they will have a greater and more instant effect than they should.

Historically speaking, most of the fighting between the British and the Japanese in Burma and the edge of India was between two or three divisions on each side.

In sum, the IPC figures in the Pacific Theatre were designed to give a balanced game and allow the USA to build a real navy in under 400 turns. These figures do not stand up to comparison with those in the European Theatre and work badly if simply added to them.

[Drax Kramer]

The simplest way to play both games simultaneously is to ban all the unit transfers between the theatres.

Instead, only the convoy money (British and US) goes to the common pool where it can be distributed among theatres as the British and American players see fit.

For example, it is fourth turn and US player received 10 IPCs from Atlantic convoys and 15 from two Pacific convoy centres. He can distribute these IPCs between Europe and Pacific as he wants, but land based IPCs (30 in Atlantic and 50 odd in Pacific) must be spent on the theatre they were derived from.

Victory conditions should also be simple. Axis win if either Germany or Japan win in their respective theatres, otherwise Allies win.


Drax

[DocD]

Sounds simple enough DRAX...have you tried it yet?

[Drax Kramer]

I ran few tests with just opening turns, but could not arrange for a full game yet. I am hoping to get six players around in order to split US into Atlantic and Pacific players.


Drax