I would argue that switching a factory from generalized production to specialized production should actually translate into a production penalty, not a production bonus.  Factory conversions in real life require retooling and retraining, which means that for a while the factory is producing less rather than more.

Wild Bill wrote,

“Like I said before although Russia needs help, I’m not in favor of Russia getting an NO bonus if the western allies make landings stick in Europe. The Russians are already getting the benefit of Germany fighting two fronts, therefore axis will have less to spend on the eastern front (that is the real bonus).”

Would you be willing to test the Russian NO before simply scrapping the idea? I think both ideas, the Russian NO and the Lend Lease idea might be a way to end the Allies “bidding.” By the time an Allied landing can stick, its usually too late for the Axis to really dislodge them anyways. This might help to end a game that really takes too long. However, it might result in quicker landings that actually fail, (resulting in no NO for Russia), and then actually make Germany stronger, because they secured “fortress” Europe.

In another thread by YG, he asked about changing the turn order to let the US go last. That might also be a good way to end the bidding process. Also, it sounds historical since the US was the last major country to enter the war.

National Objectives

Germany NO
+5 IPC’s not at war with spain 5

+5 IPC’s atleast 1 german land unit is in egypt

+5 IPC’s germany controls Denmark Zweden norway and finland

+2 IPC’s germany controls Iraq

+2 IPC’s germany controls Persia

+2 IPC’s germany controls North west persia

+5 No allied warships in the Mediterranean sea

+5 if the Axis control at least 3 (Gibraltar,S-france,Greece,Egypt

Russia
+9 IPC’s if russia controls Novosibrisk and is no longer neutral

+5 IPC’s SZ125 is free of allied warships and they control archangel

+3 for every caputered territory ,Turkey,West India,Egypt, saudi arabia

US
when at war
+25 IPC’s if your control all of its orignal territories

UK
+5 IPC’s if your control all of its orignal territories

Italy

Spain
+?

really like this idea…

is there a similar country in second world war?

i like the idea that a player can choose witch side to fight on… :D

thanks for responding…

I am new to playing on TripleA, but I noticed that “normal” dice on TripleA doesn’t seem to be so normal. I often see 3 @ 1 getting 1 hit or 2 hits way more often then when actually throwing dice on a table top. This seems to occur often when it’s more important like AAA during a S Bombing Raid. On table top I prefer normal dice. But on TripleA, I’m starting to like the LL dice option more.

Sometimes I think the TripleA “normal” dice is even worse than LL. Any thoughts and or agreement on this.

I have thought of the ASW options, but as I have some torpedo bomber types of aircraft, I have given them that option.  Although they are a tech development.  Still working out the bugs in the rules, long process, but its coming there.

I more just wanted the Light/Escort Carrier to be a smaller cheaper flat top, to get more flight deck space on the board.

Also Axis defence would be streched on 3 island instead of 2, Allies can have better option for amph.ass on italy using corsica as a base for bombers and fighters

UPDATE: Screenshot & TripleA save game file!

Note that both the map and the saved game are missing the neutral units (including French & Dutch), because the WW2v5 map in TripleA doesn’t allow for neutral units, but this should still save you a lot of setup time if you’re interested in playtesting the 1939 scenario.

AAA screenshot 1939.png
Argo 1939.tsvg

@Fredrico:

I had an idea that the French units in any territory be neutral (after Paris fell)

In case you ask me, I totally agree with that part, man…
And this should not be a special rule to France only, it should be a common rule to any player that lose his capital.

When you capital is taken, all your unoccupied territories and colonies become true neutrals. Period.

UK and US wants to land in by now neutral Morocco ? Then they must combat move in and fight.

Rome get taken by US, with both by now neutral Italian and still at war German units in Northern Italy ? Now that makes Northern Italy a contestet area, and I figure that the Italian units there must roll defense dice against the present Germans, just like they rolled against the invading US troops a second before.

But for this to work we must skip the silly and historically not very correct OOB rule that trigger all true neutrals around the globe to declare war on you

Is there a link to boardgamegeek where these files are now located?!?!
Thanks!

If you want the shorebombardment rule to be accurate, you should think about what role it played historically.

In WW2, most divisions had an artillery component. If you count the number of light, medium and heavy guns in divisions, you quickly discover there where ALOT of guns, and the armies used a lot of resources to have them there. Artillery where extremely important. When an inf attacks at 1 and defends at 2, that unit has alot of artillery as a part of the piece. Otherwise it would attack on 1 for each 3 units or something.  In essence, artillery is important.

When you have a regular battle, you deploy some artillery at the front, and some on the sides, and some in the back. What is deployed where is dependent on the type of artillery and the type of terrain. When you do an amphibious invasion, you can deploy none of your artillery. You can have some marine landing vehicles with some small caliber guns and perhaps a few amphibious tanks.  This is how the ships guns where used, they where used as a replacement for artillery.

Therefor, If I where to try to make an accurate Shore Bombardment rule, I wouls make it so that, in the first round, you could only attack with 8 units per supporting BB, 4 units per supporting CR and 1 unit per supporting DD

Is there any feedback on playing this set up/turn order/NO’s?

France goes first with more units & aircraft carrier

Italy starts out neutral

US navy with 4 aircraft carriers to start

Just to name a few changes that seem big to me.  The victory conditions listed & different NO from the original I have used before and found them to enhance the game play.

Hopefully, I can get this set up/rules in place and we can try it out soon.  Just curious in the meantime what others have discovered from their experience.

@Cmdr:

I would be concerned in allowing the UK to can open like that for the Americans.

What if the turn order ended:  USA >> Italy >> Germany (Germany being first in the turn order)?

That at least permits Italy to blitz some tanks from N. Italy into Denmark to save Germany’s arse at the last minute.

London is at risk, Calcutta is at risk, Moscow is at risk… Why shouldn’t Berlin and Rome be at risk?

Here is an example of the failure of bombing a small coastal emplacement at Normandy:

"SAINT-MARCOUF : THE CRISBECQ BATTERY
GERMAN COASTAL DEFENSE

The only heavy battery on the eastern coast of the Cotentin Peninsula, the Crisbecq Battery, was located 2.5 kilometers from the shore on a crest overlooking all of Utah Beach. From Crisbecq, the Germans could see and defend the entire coastline from Saint-Vaast-la-Hougue to Grandcamp.

Although it was never completed, the Crisbecq battery was the keystone of this portion of the German Atlantic Wall with three, long-range 210 mm cannons and a garrison of 400 men. The Allies dropped over 800 bombs on Crisbecq between April 19 and June 6, 1944. This unrelenting aerial attack climaxed on the night of June 5 when 101 four-engine bombers unleashed 598 tons of explosives on the battery. On June 6, the surroundings were unrecognizable, but the guns were still intact.

At 6 am on D-Day, as GI’s were landing on Utah Beach, Crisbecq opened fire, sinking an American destroyer.

The battery held out for several days, despite shelling by U.S. battleships and attacks from the American Infantry in hand-to-hand trench combat.

To repel the Allied assault, the German commander of Crisbecq radioed to the Azeville battery and requested that it fire on his position. Crisbecq was finally taken at 8:20 am on June 12, after the German commandment ordered its troops to evacuate to La Pernelle, between Quettehou and Barfleur. The fierce German resistance momentarily halted the Allied Advance to the north. "

Just pulled that off of a google search on D-Day.  I’m not trying to be a chump with this post, just noting that “bunkers” were built to be hidden (maybe not all of them) and to withstand such an attack even if discovered before ground operations.  I mean if 101 heavy bombers in one mission the night before D-Day have little impact why should a SBR inflict damage on a bunker?

@Der:

Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill’s meetings are represented by the 10 minute opening meeting and the 5 minute meeting every round. According to this site the three only got together three times during the whole war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_conferences

As for the table talk sample you gave, at our table it would go more like this:

Player 1: “dude, you really want to throw all those troops at Crete?”
Player 2: “Yeah, because look over there, the USA could counterattack.”
Player 1: “No they won’t with my submarines threatening them.”
Player 3: “What you should do is use those on the East Front”
Player 2: “But islands are hard to get back - Crete could pay off for several rounds.”
Player 1: “But that won’t win the game for us.”
Player 1: “OK take Crete, but use the bomber on Caucasus’ factory.”
Player 3: “No way - what if it gets shot down? Italy doesn’t have money to replace it.”
Player 1: “Seriously dude, just do this…” (Starts moving player all of player 2s pieces around) “See?”
Player 2: “No, I don’t like that” (Moves all pieces back to where they were)
Player 3: “Can we have the map for a few minutes?”

It’s this type of tomfoolery I’d like to curb - in my solution players can advise each other all they want if they are not actively trying to complete a turn. I think that is reasonable. If you have something so all important to say to your teammate that it’s worth spending 3 IPCs, you can still do it. We’ll see if it works, I could be wrong also.

I like the setting individual goals idea the most, but after thinking about it it seems too hard to implement. Each nation does not start out even. For example, Italy may have played a great game just keeping what they have with their small income, while Japan should be able to take a lot of land. How do you figure out who did better to declare individual winners? Seems complicated.

Yes, this does happen over table and in team meetings !  :lol: :lol: :lol:

We do have little talks over table if somebody needs to ask what you or him want to do if its like when US and UK are playing split sides and Germany Italy.

We do have team meetings after every turn for 5 to 10 mins if sides request it.

Last game was really good and we had more team meetings than was expected. But guys want that and get it.  :wink:

I hear what your saying. Just old school and we just disagree.
😍

Here is an Italian rule (offset to Axis Vichy rule).

Italian Co-Belligerent Army / Italian Social Republic

ICBA is a pro-Allied Italian government created after Rome is captured.  At the same time, ISR, a remnant and a pro-Axis goverment of Mussolini’s regime is created and seated out of Northern Italy.  ICBA eligible territories are all Italian controlled territories, EXCEPT Northern Italy and Italian controlled territories with German units.  These territories are treated same as pro-Allied neutrals.  All other forces are part of the Italian Social Republic.  ISR becomes the new Italy and starts with 0 IPCs.  On the each ISR turn, they CAN get up to 5 IPCs from Germany.  For the ICBA, any movement is done after Vichy.
**Procedure:  **
After Rome is captured, the following happens:
1. All ICBA forces (land/sea/air) standfast and defend against Axis attacks.  
2. ICBA land forces can move during the non-combat phase.
3. If an ICBA territory with units is occupied by Allied player, no new units are created, but any ICBA infantry units are converted to the occupying Allied power, and all others disband.    
4. ISR units may move as normal.  ISR can be ordered to attack ICBA units.
5. All ICBA units return to Axis if Rome is liberated.  ICBA cannot be re-created.
(Optional: Any ICBA controlled Allied territories return to original owner, non-infantry units disband.)

I have found that some people are frustrated with the split UK income, and also of course, the Allies’ victory conditions, you never really see them occur in real life. So I propose the following changes.

SINGLE UNITED KINGDOM: The United Kingdom will now be a single income power, starting with 45 IPCs, they will still have two capitals, one in Calcutta, the other being London. In a scenario in which a capital is captured, the United Kingdom’s income is rewarded to the Axis power that has taken the capital, however as long as they have the other capital, the United Kingdom may still produce income. The national objectives for the UK will be the same ones from the separate economies design, they are just simply awarded to the now singular UK entity.

SETUP CHANGES IN RESPONSE: Remove the Major Factories in India and United Kingdom, replace them with Minor Factories. This is to prevent the UK from over-stacking London and making Sea Lion a pipe dream, and to also to prevent the balance of power in Southeast Asia from getting out of control.

NEW VICTORY CONDITIONS FOR THE ALLIES:
Europe Victory: The Allies control 1 original European Axis Victory City; 2 of Calcutta, Sydney, and Hong Kong still under Allies Control. This must be done for a full round of play following the objectives being achieved.
Pacific Victory: Japan controls no originally Pacific Allies Victory Cities; 2 of Moscow, London, and Cairo still under Allies Control. This must be done for a full round of play following the objectives being achieved.