About: Collect Income Variant

Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: Collect Income Variant Sponge Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : 134.155.108.49:8890 associated with source dataset(s)

- by Murray Mikelait - By the rules of A&A, you collect your National Production at the end of your turn including the Industrial wealth of countries liberated that turn. The variant: instead you collect your income at the beginning of your next turn. This gives your opponent a chance to take back their territory before you can gain credit from it ... by this variant, it is not likely that you will gain IPCs from territories that you didn't hold for more than a full round of turns.

Attributes	Values
rdfs:label	Collect Income Variant
rdfs:comment	- by Murray Mikelait - By the rules of A&A, you collect your National Production at the end of your turn including the Industrial wealth of countries liberated that turn. The variant: instead you collect your income at the beginning of your next turn. This gives your opponent a chance to take back their territory before you can gain credit from it ... by this variant, it is not likely that you will gain IPCs from territories that you didn't hold for more than a full round of turns.
dcterms:subject	AAC Map AAC Map Boardgame Scenarios Boardgame Scenarios
abstract	- by Murray Mikelait - By the rules of A&A, you collect your National Production at the end of your turn including the Industrial wealth of countries liberated that turn. The variant: instead you collect your income at the beginning of your next turn. This gives your opponent a chance to take back their territory before you can gain credit from it ... by this variant, it is not likely that you will gain IPCs from territories that you didn't hold for more than a full round of turns. Example: U.K. & Germany fighting back and forth over Western Europe. By the 2nd Edition rules they would be credited the 6 IPCs at the end of each of their consecutive turns; (this to me doesn't make economical sense). I say that a "war zone" over which two opponents are continually smacking each other around shouldn't yield any production -- until one side "holds the fort" so to speak .... Example: Japan loses Soviet Far East to U.S.A. -- thus U.S.A. liberates Soviet Far East back for U.S.S.R. Although Japan may have been credited with that territory at the beginning of their own turn, U.S.S.R. will be rewarded the 2 IPCs since it was under Allies control at the beginning of U.S.S.R's turn -- this is cutting the economic realism pretty close -- but it's still better than by the original rules in my opinion. The rule variant's quirks: I haven't determined for certain if one side would feel benefits from this variant more than the other, but my theory is that it would be a deterrent against attacks that only intend to "bloody the nose" of an opponent. By this, I say that the Axis may benefit a tad -- when I have played, I've found that by the Allies' economic superiority, the Allies are free to "throw caution to the wind" -- but if to no economic gain of their own (even if for a turn) it may deter such "suicide missions". Another quirk: this variant creates the need to write down or keep note of money "owed to the bank" from the result of rocket attacks or strategic bombing raids (for if a player has spent all their money from last turn ..... they'll have nothing to give in).

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3217, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Standard Edition
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2012 OpenLink Software