In Axis and Allies 1940 (Europe/Pacific/Global), what is the game effect of ignoring most or all of the National Objectives (bonus income) and simply not playing with them. This reduces complexity and the need to constantly reference rules, but does it significantly unbalance the game?

Do any changes need to be implemented to make removal of the objectives balanced? For example, if you feel the Allied objectives are easy and the Axis ones hard, maybe the balancing change is the give the Allies +10 IPCs each per turn instead of their objectives.

2 Answers 2


First, it is not particularly clear that A&A 1940 was balanced WITH all the rules - the changes in the second edition (unless you were referencing that) do in most people's opinions contribute to balance (VCs for Axis and setup changes).

Even with that, though, the NOs do contribute to game balance pretty greatly. Note that they are not symmetric - the US for instance purely gains income when at war, whereas Germany has both peace and wartime NOs. The loss of US and Soviet extra income will definitely be detrimental to their cause. Replacing NOs with free income is a reasonable idea, especially given how nebulous NO "hardness" is, but make sure to not just add it all the time - add NO income when appropriate (when at war, with who, etc).


The addition of national objectives helps the Allies in Allies and Axis Pacific, in an otherwise Axis-favoring game. The addition of national objectives helps the Axis in Allies and Axis Europe by reducing the Allied advantage. If you take these two effects together in Allies and Axis Global, they more or less balance out.

The national objectives in Allies and Axis Pacific encourage the Americans and Australians to cooperate in the South Pacific, which they should be doing, and what they did in the real war. In lieu of these objectives, give the Americans an extra 5 IPCs for San Francisco, and the Aussies 5 additional IPCs for Sydney, so they have 15 instead of 10 to start.

The national objectives encourage the Germans and Italians to play more in the Mediterranean. Instead, just give Germany 5 more IPCs for Berlin, and Italy 5 more IPCs for Rome. Again, this gives Italy 15 starting IPCs instead of 10.

If you add 10 Axis IPCs in Europe and balance that with 10 Allied IPCs in the Pacific while eliminating the national objectives, you've simplified the global game. You have better balanced the two local games as well, relative to no national objectives and no additional IPCs.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .