Elfboy sent me the following terse email:
For the record, I was not, in fact, interested in the nuclear weapons development option. I think Axis & Allies is a fine game as it stands, and I’ve not played nearly enough of it to yearn for new gameplay options. Having said that, I think the homegrown rules are interesting, but put a little too much advantage on the offense. (Yeah yeah yeah, this is warfare we’re simulating – at some base level it must be about offense…) What I like about Axis & Allies is the balance it strikes between strategy and luck. Increasing the attack role values decreases the luck required to win, and therfore sacrifices the strategic value of any particular combat movement.
If you’re going to add new rules, you ought to add in things like the capacity to destroy industrial complexes and antiaircraft, and maybe even capture enemy naval or armor units. Maybe you could capture infantry and charge a certain number of IPCs for return (or a hostage exchange!).
Ultimately, I think adding to the rules presents a slippery slope. The more realistic you endeavour to make the game, the less enteraining it becomes. The fun of A&A for me is the abstraction of complex international warfare to a fairly legitimate balance between luck and strategy.
As for the rest of the “dork” commentary, it should be known that I do play D&D on a fairly regular basis – in both traditional Pen-And-Paper and Computer Role Playing Game formats.