About to start a new test game.
During the movement phase all land units can be moved into a maximum of 2 territories. However, movement into a hostile or contested territory can only be made during the unit's 1st movement. and such a move ends a unit's movements.
Fighter movement rules remain the same. They can move up to two spaces. When moving two spaces , it doesn't matter what the status of the first space is. It can be a sea zone, a friendly or contested territory, or even a hostile territory. However, a fighter must end its move in a territory containing land units belonging to your power.
Moving out of a contested territory
When moving out of a contested territory units can only be moved to an adjacent territory and that territory must have had at least one of the moving player's units in it or the territory is controlled by moving player at the beginning of the turn.
All ship movement, with the exception of cruisers, which can move 3 sea zones, is limited to 2 sea zones. However, all ships beginning their movement from a sea zone with a friendly naval base gain 1 additional point of movement range. Moving into a hostile sea zone will require at lest one round of combat. After at least one round of combat the moving player can withdraw back into a sea zone from which at least one of the withdrawing ships came.
Unrestricted Submarine Warfare
I want to try this out... On the US and then again during the British turn, the Germany player will roll 1 die for each German submarines in sea zones 2, 7, and/or 8. Each die roll of 4 or higher are ignored and all others are totaled. The attacked power (US or Britain) will deduct this totaled amount from the income it collects during the Collect Income phase.
Just wanted to say I like the above proposals for both land and sea much better then their previous counterparts (and I am looking foreword to trying them out).
Larry, just FYI we are playing a game right now and are experimenting with only your capital giving +1 to your ground units in movement. We didn't put any restrictions on this, and allowed you to move 2 spaces into friendly, contested, or enemy controlled territories from your capital (allowing this to lead into attacks might be over the top, I like how you have not allowed the 2nd move to be used for attacks). We took this approach because it keeps the flow of units coming from a central production center that the game established. At this time we didn't allow you to get +1 from a friendly or captured capital, but that could be explored as well (like for US/UK getting +1 out of Paris).
I will say that allowing ground units to move two spaces from your capital, and perform an attack has been a game changer. All 3 CP's can really put a lot of pressure on the Russians because they can attack into Russian soil (or Romania) from their capitals. It has also allowed the CP to keep their supply lines flowing much better, so that part we really liked. Surprisingly enough one of the biggest change of events in this experiment was in the Mideast because the extra movement the Turks got from their capital (ending in attack in this experiment) allows the Turks to counter pretty much any of the UK first round movement/attacks (like TJ and Mesopotamia). In this experimental game the UK India is in quite a bit of trouble, even though they built 8 units (4 inf, 3 art, 1 ftr) there the first turn, an 5 more on turn two. Because of the CP moving much faster on the Russians, the UK is heading north to try to help out, leaving India itself in trouble (Turks coming full tilt being able to move 2 from their capital).
I like how you (Larry) have done your new ground proposal so the extra movement doesn't allow for an attack. It is really like a non combat phase rolled into the single movement phase this game has established (nice job). I would agree with an earlier poster that you might consider allowing the 2nd move into a contested territory as long as you don't perform an attack (of course following the established rules for contested territories movement).
I like the +1 from NB rule much better then the other sea proposals, and am looking forward to see if the CP can find a way to use the retreat option to their advantage. Thinking maybe the Austrians (or Turks) build a sub, slide it past the Italian navy, then attack from two directions to retreat their surviving fleet somewhere unexpected (sneaky CP LOL).
I do need a couple clarifications though.
1) So a cruiser leaving a NB could move 4 spaces now (I know it would have to stop in the first hostel sz) Cruisers leaving a NB can move 4 spaces. This represents a +1 move added to the cruiser's normal movement of 3 sea zones.
2) Just wanted to clarify that with ships you can still move into a hostel sz and elect not to attack right? The going one round of battle would only apply if you do the retreat option. It is not required that you conduct combat when moving into a hostile sea zone but if you do you must do at least one round of combat. After at least one round of combat the moving player can withdraw back into a sea zone from which at least one of the withdrawing ships came. The retreating units must retreat together and the sea zone to which they retreat must have been friendly at the beginning of the turn.
BTW Larry, there has been a lot of talk about a couple other things over at AA.org that should be brought to your attention. With the above options you have put out, some could be remedied (or compounded), but thought I'd run it by you any way. These above proposals are as you said for optional play, and probably won't make it into the base game (or maybe they will?).
I have started a new thread for this topic, hope you will join in (see link below).
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/ ... 44&t=18292
Items of concern:
1) The allied fleets, should they be reduced some. The French in particular, maybe the Russians Black Sea too.
2) UK India having no build limits. Some are seeing the UK using all income in India for 2-3 turns to overwhelm the Turks, or to rescue the Russians.