Global War 1940 2nd ed.

[baron Münchhausen]

Cruiser
A7
D7
M3
C9

What is DD combat values?

I hope Cruiser is purchased in your game?

She is stronger and much cheaper compared to G40 OOB:
Cruiser
A6
D6
M2
C12

[General 6 Stars]

@Baron:

Cruiser
A7
D7
M3
C9

What is DD combat values?

A3
D3
M2
C6

I hope Cruiser is purchased in your game?

It should be now with the new M3 and taking out blockers. We will see in game now. I do see maybe a bit of less destroyer buying but will see.
We crunched these DD Cr numbers awhile back Baron.

She is stronger and much cheaper compared to G40 OOB:
Cruiser
A6
D6
M2
C12

Maybe this will make the boring Pacific get a jolt !!!
Gettin tired of the Normal KGF but thats history. But the changes maybe enough where now Allies can keep Axis from winning on the Pacific side for not holding there VC points and Allies steal one or two.

[baron Münchhausen]

I crunched these numbers with Enigma formula, Cruiser is just a bit stronger than DD.
It might be interesting with M3, people will get more for the money.

Reading my HR with Cruiser against blockers, it said: Cruiser have to survive blocker’s defense so Cruiser gain control of SZ.  Then, main fleet can cross this newly controlled SZ to launch an attack on SZ behind blocker.

Probably one issue will be about slow TP not able to follow Cruiser, but introducing Cruiser as a way to make naval blitz might be interesting to analyze how PTO is changed.

Keep us posted on this one, it is a major change to help cruiser compete with DD and is within Redesigned playground.

Here is the post which includes a few conditions to follow so to blitz into a second SZ:
@Baron:

@Black_Elk:

It might be worth separating the two ideas and pursuing them in isolation. On land I think the blitz concept works as outlined. At sea the idea is more aspirational, we wanted to see if a similar blitz move might be activated by cruisers, but how exactly to work that, I’m not as confident.

In both cases the idea was to provided a special attack that makes blocking/stalling more challenging for the defender. So instead of covering with 1 infantry unit, or 1 dd to stall a massive force, here you’d have to manage the defense with the blitz factored in.

I like it on land with the armor mech and tacs, possibly fighters. Naval blitz, if it could be worked out, would probably look a bit different and might have a separate system.

In Pacific Naval Combat, the usual twin powers can-opener is often made by German’s StratBs against Destroyer blocker.
After it’s done, Japan will move a lot of warships through the empty SZ to get into another SZ for combat.

What is the real difference, if it is Japan which have to use a few of his units to wipe the Destroyer unit, then reach with his main fleet the second SZ?
All that I see is a better coordination of units by Japan but less units available for the main Naval Combat beyond the blocker.

There is still a gain to use 1 or 2 blockers tactics (same as dividing attacking troops amongst 2 combat zones: odds always worse) but blocker tactics is not as strong as OOB when German’s StratBombers are not in Japan.

If you want to keep a similar blocker impact, but not an absolute one, I suggested 2 ways:
first, it should be mandatory to control the first SZ (hence, it is different from the German’s StBs can-opener in which the SZ is uncontrolled).
second, it could be a condition to destroy all blockers in a single combat round, to proceed to a Naval blitz.
So, Japan would need to use more units to be sure to get the hit. And, if not, in some unlucky times, the Destroyer will still block the Naval forces in the first SZ.

Do you see how the attacking forces will be less powerful than under the twin powers can-opener?

So, is their other conditions to think about which can imply Cruiser, so you can have both world?

Thinking out loud:
Cruiser could be the naval unit required to perform such destruction of the blocker (rationalized as doing an advance scouting mission to open the way to the main fleet)?
To perform a Naval Blitz, 1 Cruiser unit must controlled a given SZ in which pass through all the other Naval units.

So, in a sense, Cruiser, same as Tank, is needed to perform the breakthrough. Tank help MechInf to reach the second territory.
Cruiser help the whole fleet to reach the second SZ, but it must stay behind, in the first SZ.

And, for instance, if there is 2 US Destroyers blockers, probably Japan must at least wipe them with 1 Cruiser and other units, such as Subs and Destroyers or even planes.
Of course, the cheaper the better (Subs), and if Japan is unable to gain control of this SZ with her Cruiser unit (for example, all units were destroyed), then it can only move all his Naval unit into this SZ.
In some unlucky cases, such a Naval blitz move would be costlier for Japan than just controlling cautiously the blocked SZ  by moving all his Naval Units in the first SZ only.

So, probably blocking with 1 Destroyer and 1 Submarine (14 IPCs) can become an interesting mix (and be much more historically accurate).
Because, the attacker wouldn’t be able to protect the Cruiser (with a few planes) without also bringing  a Sub or a Destroyer, in case the the defending Subs get a hit or a surprise strike hit.

What do you think of this?

[General 6 Stars]

@Baron:

I crunched these numbers with Enigma formula, Cruiser is just a bit stronger than DD.
It might be interesting with M3, people will get more for the money.

Reading my HR with Cruiser against blockers, it said: Cruiser have to survive blocker’s defense so Cruiser gain control of SZ.  Then, main fleet can cross this newly controlled SZ to launch an attack on SZ behind blocker.

Probably one issue will be about slow TP not able to follow Cruiser, but introducing Cruiser as a way to make naval blitz might be interesting to analyze how PTO is changed.

Keep us posted on this one, it is a major change to help cruiser compete with DD and is within Redesigned playground.

Here is the post which includes a few conditions to follow so to blitz into a second SZ:
@Baron:

@Black_Elk:

It might be worth separating the two ideas and pursuing them in isolation. On land I think the blitz concept works as outlined. At sea the idea is more aspirational, we wanted to see if a similar blitz move might be activated by cruisers, but how exactly to work that, I’m not as confident.

In both cases the idea was to provided a special attack that makes blocking/stalling more challenging for the defender. So instead of covering with 1 infantry unit, or 1 dd to stall a massive force, here you’d have to manage the defense with the blitz factored in.

I like it on land with the armor mech and tacs, possibly fighters. Naval blitz, if it could be worked out, would probably look a bit different and might have a separate system.

In Pacific Naval Combat, the usual twin powers can-opener is often made by German’s StratBs against Destroyer blocker.
After it’s done, Japan will move a lot of warships through the empty SZ to get into another SZ for combat.

What is the real difference, if it is Japan which have to use a few of his units to wipe the Destroyer unit, then reach with his main fleet the second SZ?
All that I see is a better coordination of units by Japan but less units available for the main Naval Combat beyond the blocker.

There is still a gain to use 1 or 2 blockers tactics (same as dividing attacking troops amongst 2 combat zones: odds always worse) but blocker tactics is not as strong as OOB when German’s StratBombers are not in Japan.

If you want to keep a similar blocker impact, but not an absolute one, I suggested 2 ways:
first, it should be mandatory to control the first SZ (hence, it is different from the German’s StBs can-opener in which the SZ is uncontrolled).
second, it could be a condition to destroy all blockers in a single combat round, to proceed to a Naval blitz.
So, Japan would need to use more units to be sure to get the hit. And, if not, in some unlucky times, the Destroyer will still block the Naval forces in the first SZ.

Do you see how the attacking forces will be less powerful than under the twin powers can-opener?

So, is their other conditions to think about which can imply Cruiser, so you can have both world?

Thinking out loud:
Cruiser could be the naval unit required to perform such destruction of the blocker (rationalized as doing an advance scouting mission to open the way to the main fleet)?
To perform a Naval Blitz, 1 Cruiser unit must controlled a given SZ in which pass through all the other Naval units.

So, in a sense, Cruiser, same as Tank, is needed to perform the breakthrough. Tank help MechInf to reach the second territory.
Cruiser help the whole fleet to reach the second SZ, but it must stay behind, in the first SZ.

And, for instance, if there is 2 US Destroyers blockers, probably Japan must at least wipe them with 1 Cruiser and other units, such as Subs and Destroyers or even planes.
Of course, the cheaper the better (Subs), and if Japan is unable to gain control of this SZ with her Cruiser unit (for example, all units were destroyed), then it can only move all his Naval unit into this SZ.
In some unlucky cases, such a Naval blitz move would be costlier for Japan than just controlling cautiously the blocked SZ  by moving all his Naval Units in the first SZ only.

So, probably blocking with 1 Destroyer and 1 Submarine (14 IPCs) can become an interesting mix (and be much more historically accurate).
Because, the attacker wouldn’t be able to protect the Cruiser (with a few planes) without also bringing  a Sub or a Destroyer, in case the the defending Subs get a hit or a surprise strike hit.

What do you think of this?

Sorry I didnt see this the rest of this post.

Yes I like it a lot.
In my game remember you cant buy naval or air bases. Whats on map is what you get.
So tactical non combat moves are important. Also you can only move 3 spaces in naval non combat base to base only. Otherwise a normal 2 move only in combat. But now the Cruiser being M3 it still can M3 in combat and 4 in non combat base to base. So here is most moves a cruiser can do in non combat naval base to naval base.
Dont forget the land figs now M5 - M6 from airbase for support of Cruisers M3. So you still need to make tactical moves for planes just from certain airbases.
Toyko - Hawaii
Toyko - Carolina islands
SF. - Carolina islands
SF. - New Britain
Hawaii - Philliphines both sides of island
Sydney - Java
S. AF - Australia
S. AF - Morocco
S. AF - Cairo Med sz
Washington - Gibr
Midway - Carolina islands
Midway - Philliphines
London - Gibr inside Med sz.

I may have missed one.
Now Japan could cutoff that UK AC built in S.AF T1 for Anzac.

I may just buy Rat Patrol Cruisers ! lol

Anyway this maybe the fix for the Pacific side ( Cruisers M3 - M4 Naval base to naval base non combat only ) where now the US and Anzac keep the axis from winning by just going Pacific ? Can they get the Dutch Islands back faster ? Will this force Japan to go all out in Asia just to get money they need badly after losing the Dutch Islands ? Will japan now abandon the Dutch Islands and just do a Calcutta-Asia crush ? Also Italy now being so strong in my game maybe forced to buy more navy just to counter a US -UK fleet moving to the Med with support from S. AF fleet ? This would take Pressure off Russia from Italy supporting Germany through Turkey.
Will this make the Allies to strong in the Pacific now ? Denying Japan the money they need badly ?
You would think at least this gives Anzac that little help they need in game for islands if Japan-US even out in the Pacific still.

In other games where you have more air-naval bases in setup than my game and being able to buy them also in other games will the Cruiser M3 and TAC M5 M6-AB Fig M5 M6-AB be to unbalancing on Europe or Pacific side ?

This would spice up the Europe side. And the main goal for change is to get the Allies something to do in the Pacific finally and give the US like 4 options on Europe side tactics or at least now Maybe 3 options on Pacific side.

Stay tuned. Same channel. Same time.

[Leatherneckinlv]

A suggestion….Cruiser when paired with a battleship…2 hits to destroy

[General 6 Stars]

Ok. Will look into it.

[Leatherneckinlv]

It’s Sireblood’s idea….tested it a few times…it’s brilliant

[baron Münchhausen]

@Leatherneckinlv:

It’s Sireblood’s idea….tested it a few times…it’s brilliant

With OOB BBs A8 D8 C20 and Cruiser A6 D6 C12. It is like having twice 2hits warships at 16 IPCs (D12s) with Att7 Def7.
A kind of Heavy Cruiser, clearly make this unit more dangerous than Battleships only for cost.

Enigma Formula:
2hits warships at 16 IPCs (D12s) with Att7 Def7
Combined fleet purchase of 1 BB+1CA, 4 hits:
(367/16^2)1.618034= **1.593 powerhit**
vs
Battleship
(368/20^2)1.618034= **1.165 powerhit**

compared to OOB 1 hit Destroyer (D12s) A4 D4 C8:
364/8^2= **2.25 powerhit**

Ok, so this is not too much OP.
Just that BBs fleet is much weaker.

SS Cruiser A7 D7 M3 C9
36*7/81 = 3.11

Cruiser A7 D6 M3 Cost 10
Offence: 36*7/100 = 2.52
Defence: 36*6/100 = 2.16

SS 1 hit Destroyer A3 D3 M2 C6
36*3/36 = 3.00

SS Submarine A4 D2 M2 C7
Offence: 36*4/49 = 2.94 Surprise strike: 4.41
Defense:36*2/49 = 1.47 Surprise strike: 1.95

1 hit Destroyer A3 D3 M2 C5
36*3/25 = 4.32

Submarine A4 D2 M2 C6
Offence: 36*4/36 = 4.00 Surprise strike: 6.00
Defense: 36*2/36 = 2.00 Surprise strike: 2.67

[General 6 Stars]

Will stick with the 1 hit Cruiser. Leatherneck wasnt aware of cost for pieces in game.

[General 6 Stars]

Me and bud got in 4 turns with new values to pieces with a few map changes.
Stg Bomber :  Ok  many 2 or 3 plane attacks with a few hits per round but still not over powering.
H. Bomber :   Ok  no buys yet   US going different route this game.
Tac Bomber : Ok  pick hit with return is working great. M5 havent seen any difference yet.
Fig : Ok  M5 making some impact. With a M6-AB  plane is great for support from the all islands. But my concern is in other games where theres more airbases setup in games compared to mine plus buying them in game which my game u cant will it be over powering ? So with Japan having more islan airbases early in game will air support be to strong for Japan ?
Naval Dive : Some impact on only M4. Still great from carriers for support. FEC Dive Bomber did Oil Refinery damage on Sumatra being owned by Japan. 5 damage every turn until repaired.
Naval Fig : Same as Dive Bomber above. Good Support. Japan going for Calcutta next turn. Need all planes.
AAA Gun : can bring in combat. One is in Paris from UK attack.
Transport : 50/50  no plane shot. taken as casualty anytime. This hurt Germany some in battles with there subs. First time testing this. All other games they got shot at a plane and if attacked with no surface ships got to get a chance to escape if they werent killed first. May go back to old rule with only a shot at a plane @1 instead of @2.
Cruiser : The M3 is deadly on subs alone and a great piece for US UK on Europe side for clearing out convoy boxes controlled by German Wolf packs. Pacific side has them but they maybe better in packs of 2 or 3 with plane support from islands or carriers but beware the Cruiser is a lurker now. Im calling them now the Cruiser Rats. They had an early impact (German subs) first 2 turns but now they have tamed a bit until you can get more together. I see the Battleship C16 not getting bought now for my cost in game for a battleship compared to a Cruiser C9. I may have to lower the Cruiser Move to 2 or raise the cost to 10. Or I leave it and make German subs C5 or A5-WPA6 or D3 or put a few more Ger subs out in the Atlantic. More play testing.
As far as the map pic below UK got Rockets tech on first turn. So they been bombing W. Germany and Paris from the start and then I, US landed in Paris with major air support and got diced (German kill % was like 80%) on T3 and still got Paris. Germany took it back but UK T4 took it back on there turn with minor factory and US landed support.
Germany got the V-2 Rocket event card on T2 ( first time in any game this card came up amazing ) and has been bombing London which is helping them just a bit. Italy now has to abandon Africa some what and Garrison Paris for Germany and no more can opening against Russia. Now Axis have to deal with UK minor Factory in Paris plus the Rockets Tech. Now they can finally bomb Berlin. So in order now for Axis win, theres 2 routes to go. They have 23 VC points and need 7 more and hold a turn for win. Route 1 is Japan takes Calcutta (2), Stalingrad (2) and Paris (3) for 30 points and a win. OR get Calcutta (2), Stalingrad (2), Cairo (1) and ( if they dont get Paris) 1 bonus point for control of all Mideast oil territories and  1 bonus point for total Axis income of 178 or higher for a total of 30 points.

[General 6 Stars]

Pacific side not much change but Anzac just got Java with US support close by. China and Russia making Japan spend money on inf now and Japan should get Calcutta next turn and then go the the defense for rest of game and see if Germany can pull out the victory or axis lose it with some push in Pacific. The M5 fig was nice for both sides coming from AB islands and getting that move of 6 and picking a few ships off with either a cruiser or destroyer. The Figs from Hawaii help US  get back there 2 convoy boxes from Japan earlier in game than normal. So now US seems to have like 8 more icps for the last 2 turns compared to all the other games now with planes now moving 5-AB6. Pic of map below.

Just to let you know the 4 Dutch Islands dont have the correct territory values on them yet. Was trying something else in another game. But now East Indies worth 2, Borneo, Sumatra and Java worth  4+1 for oil derrick = 5 ea. territory. You can SBR the oil derricks up to 5 damage and that damage goes against your `income total until you repair. This area maybe changed to if its to hard for Japan to take back islands but at least if cant take back can damage allies oil and go against allies income.

[General 6 Stars]

As far as Tech only 4 so far in game. As mentioned before this never seems to be over powering in any game so far. Theres been like 20 break thru attemp rolls already in game so far. As for shorter game I believe it is happening now with games ending by turn 8.
Axis total income is on top of income chart. Need 178 total Axis income for 1 bonus point. Above VC chart is the Axis total VC points where they need 30 and hold 1 turn for win.

Anyway just throwing out some results from piece value changes.

[barney]

Good action SS !

[General 6 Stars]

Thanks Barney.

T5 Axis got 2 more VC s but lost 2 of there own.
Nice battles going on.

[baron Münchhausen]

Let’s go boys, you can win!!!

:-D :-D :-D

[General 6 Stars]

Just a small update. End of T6.
Axis has 26 VC points total now and will get back Oslo (1 VC point) to = 27 VC points and Axis also taking Paris (3 VC points) back for the 3rd time for 30 Total VC points. If they still have control of 30 points at end of turn 7, they just need to hold for 1 more turn T8 for Victory.
If denied there they still have the option of just defending Berlin if they cant hold Paris and go for Cairo (1 VC point) and the 2 VC bonus points for the win.

Cruisers M3 for now good for defending and attacking convoy boxes. Also for leaving a ship alone somewhere. US (Axis subs) and Anzac (fleet defense) buying most in game for now. But this M3 Cruiser needs to be play tested more by different players and see if theres other options out there for them. Im sure there is.

You still need Destroyers in game and for them pesky subs from Anzac.
Have not had any Destroyer screen blocking attacks yet. Seems nobody wants to screen now with ships. Just building up fleets. Only thing different as of now is just looking for any Cruisers in areas.  :-(
But the Cruisers do help Anzac for fleet protection off of Java plus keeping Japan from leaving any fleet sizes of 2-4 ships alone and can SBR Sumatra and Borneo against Japan controlled Oil Derricks for up to 5 damage ea per turn against there total income. Harder for Japan to defend for now and can’t really keep figs on islands for scramble against SBR attacking Dive Bombers from allies because then allies can pic off them planes form carriers off of Java. This is  nice sweet spot for action.

But also in game US is going mostly Europe side in game. But Japan would be up the creek I think if US went mostly Pacific now just from the Cruiser M3 C9, Tac-Fig M5.
Or anyway it would be a huge Naval battle for taking back Calcutta or more naval battles in Pacific. Will need to try KJF in game. Could be juicy ? Dud ? Allies over powered ? Will shall see.

Tac-Fig M5 helps the Axis as far as getting to some ground battles faster and any air support.

[baron Münchhausen]

Italy and Germany purchase land-base planes most of time?

This game Axis is winning, right?
Was also the case last time, right?

Cruiser M3 seems to give Allies more tactical options.

[General 6 Stars]

@Baron:

Italy and Germany purchase land-base planes most of time?

Nope

This game Axis is winning, right?

Dont know yet ?  50/50

Was also the case last time, right?

Ya but bad allies plan

Keep in mind the 2 Countries NAs they receive at game start does change your buys a bit in each different game and maybe 1 strong Tech when ever you receive it if you get it. I got no real complaints yet. Needs more playing time.

[General 6 Stars]

One other thing so far in game.
With the Stg. Bombers now A 4d12s @2 every round is averaging about .90  hit per bomber per round of combat. Ave up a bit.

Finally had a good Stg. Bombing attack in game for Japan.

Japan had 2 Stg. Bombers attack for 2 rounds and got 16 d12s @2  = 10 hits. That was for taking Calcutta. Otherwise they would of lost maybe 2-4 planes.

So the reward is there which I was looking for.

[General 6 Stars]

Baron or who ever is interested

Ive been thinking and after playing 6 turns with the no ship blockers rule but you can screen block and as I mentioned earlier post it seems nobody is screening anything and fleets just getting bigger because seems most want those extra ships that would of block been blocking saved.
Why would I want to try to screen a attacking fleet with some ships from my fleet to screen and then get wiped out and then by fleet is weaker and the attacking fleet is stronger and now he can do his combat move attack on my fleet. It doesnt really weaken his fleet before he attacks in the long run.
But I also see if a fleet wants to move and theres not enough sz in between fleets then something may happen.
So for game sake why not put the ship blocking rule back in game but u would need to have at least 2 naval surface ships to block.
I will have to see what happens in rest of test game turns.

Just seems to be no naval attacks but just cruisers and subs for convoy boxes control.