G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

[Black_Elk]

For me, I think it would be hard to go back to the classic transport, just out of sheer force of habit. I am now used to writing them off. Not having to track that hitpoint and defensive pip does make it simpler to make faster calculations in my head. I don’t know what kind of fodder spam might result or not from using the C8 transport or how it would effect the composition of the USN or IJN over the long haul.  But that said, I can’t see any reason not to include it as an option, if it’s only like a couple lines and one tech add. So that’s why its tossed in there.

Since I was recently reminded of CWO Marc’s list describing the political situation of the game map relative to the actual war…
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36590.30

For anyone not really familiar with tripleA’s edit mode, this is an example of the sort of thing you can do with the map.

Here with a new color for Pro-Allies Neutrals, its simple to say, change Liberia to be Pro-Allies on the fly.
Or in South America, you could make Paraguay Pro-Axis on the fly, or Bolivia Pro-Allies, things of that sort, and its basically just a couple clicks.

Brazil shows the diagonal relief (which indicates which tiles are pro-side in the OOB game) but at least here, the colors are different, so it’s easy to tell all the neutrals apart, even without the reliefs.

[Black_Elk]

Again for those who haven’t really used TripleA, here is another example of what you can do to the map via Edit by adding Convoy and Blockade zones. Shows the little flags we currently have at Medium size, indicating which additional sea lanes can be contested…

The HR stuff regarding units, VCs, capital capture, NOs etc, are similarly handled via an edit.

[baron Münchhausen]

We might be surprised by this quatuor : StB A0 D0 C5, DD A1 D1 C5, Sub A2fs D1fs C6 and a TP A0 D1 C8.
At least, I say people to keep an open mind, eradicating auto-destroy of a TPs fleet might reveal an unforseen bonus.

[barney]

Here’s the House Rule link

https://www.sendspace.com/file/1llm1x

Techs are explained on page 95 of this thread.

Reduces convoy image by 50%

https://www.sendspace.com/file/mlm7qm

[Black_Elk]

Awesome! Thanks man!

Here is another sort of simple mod, which is more modest in scope. Similar to OOB just with a few unit tweaks, and a slightly expanded economy.

It only has A2/D2 Dogfighting, an A3 Strategic Bomber, and the new VCs +1 bonus. Otherwise it is the same as regular G40.

With the new VC centers, you can see Oslo is at least a bit closer to home now haha.
:-D

G40 HR VCs with A3 bombers A2D2 intercept.tsvg

[Black_Elk]

Just to reiterate the basic aim…

So instead of having to download Somebody’s ultimate G40 mod version 5.9 or whatever, with a new map every time, the idea is that you grab one comprehensive HR file with all the options available. Rather than a mapfile, you just use a gamesaves to create the mods to your playgroup’s tastes on the fly. This way it’s easier for the next person to come along and say for example “I like everything about that dude’s mod, except for x y z” and instead of creating a new map file that everyone has to download, they just switch the settings on/off until they get something they like better, and fire it up.

This I think is what would distinguish the HR package generally, from a pre-set mod, or an official game where all the decisions need to be made beforehand. Because you could change it on the fly, and everyone would only need the one file (updated periodically with new material) to play any of the possible mods. Ideally the more material that can be adjusted the better, so it is as adaptive as possible, and as close to the table top experience as we can make it.

[CWO Marc]

@Black_Elk:

Sweet! That method is going to save me like half a dozen steps over the way I used to do it in the past!

Excellent.  Reminds me of the time when a colleague at the office saw me block (for copying purposes) several pages of text in a Word document by using my pointer and scrolling up through the document.  He leaned over and pressed “CTRL-A” and got the same result instantaneously.  I said, “Uh…you mean there’s a keyboard shortcut for what I’ve been doing all along?”

[barney]

Here’s a save of what i’ve been using Elk. This is what’s on:

<techname name=“Attack0Cost5Bomber_ChangerMustActivate”><techname name=“AirfieldM2”><techname name=“SubsCanEvadeDestroyers_ChangerMustActiv ate”>techname name=“PacificIslandAndPU_Change”/>
<techname name=“ConvoyAndBlockade”><techname name=“RussianNationalObjectives”><techname name=“ChineseMilitia”><techname name=“PrimitiveTerrain”><techname name=“FactoryLimited_ChangerMustActivate”>techname name=“Mobile_Artillery”/>
<techname name=“Escort_Carrier_ChangerMustActivate”><techname name=“AAGunC4_ChangerMustActivate”>techname name=“Elite_GiveToAll” tech=“mechanizedInfantry”/>
<techname name=“AirTransport_GiveToAll” tech=“paratroopers”><techname name=“CloseAirSupport”><techname name=“FlyingTiger_ChangerMustActivate”><techname name=“GetCapitalCashOnce_ChangerMustActivate”><techname name=“MilitaryBase_Produces_3inf”><techname name=“AdditionalVictoryCitiesWorthPUs_Changer MustActivate”><techname name=“NormandyTurnsProAllied_ChangerMustActiv ate”><techname name=“SphereOfInfluence_ChangerMustActivate”>I add BB and CA AA rd2. Militia for all and Bunkers rd3.

Been using most of these rules the last 2-3 years. I find it to be fun anyway :)

Fixed placement with MBs

Global Mix One.tsvg</techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname></techname>

[simon33]

I’ve updated the XML for the Canadian Mod to include a universal scramble. Gets a lot of Java errors because it adds a unit “airstrip” to every territory which can’t be seen or bombed. I’ll attach the updated XML here in case anyone is interested.

G40Redesign_Test.xml

[barney]

Here’s a shot of the A-Bomb tech. It will be added in the future

[baron Münchhausen]

Scarry  :evil:

[Argothair]

Cool! So I downloaded the new map. It wouldn’t run at first; I had to move it out of my tripleA/downloadedMaps folder, then unzip it, then copy the unzipped folder into tripleA/downloadedMaps. Maybe that’s normal; I’ve never gotten a map file from SendSpace before.

Mostly everything looks good. The Americans were able to place a Military Base in Southwest Mexico but not in Mexico proper, which was odd, because SW Mexico was worth 2 IPCs and Mexico was worth 1. I’m also not sure I understand the point of limiting Military Bases to territories with 1 or fewer production – seems to me that if the Germans wanted a military base in, e.g., Romania, they could have put one there. Hard to see why you would be able to put a training camp in Palau but not Romania.

I had Germany invade Greece with a tank (blitzing from Romania) and then back the tank up with “airborne” elite troops, but I did not send any planes to Greece, and the system still allowed the attack. On the other hand, the system did not allow an attack on Greece with just the elite troops; it said that I could only attack a territory that had already been invaded. Not sure if this is working as intended or not.

I landed a German fighter and a German strategic bomber (defenseless) in Belgium. I then attacked that group with a French fighter. The French fighter won, killing the German fighter, and I never retreated, but the German strategic bomber did not die. That seemed odd; if the strategic bomber is defenseless like a defenseless transport, then it should die when the defenders are gone. I also attacked a German fleet with a British strategic bomber (defenseless), and that time the bomber died properly the way I expected.

Playing with convoy zones and blockades and lend-lease national objectives seems a bit messy; I wouldn’t recommend using all of those options at once. It’s nice to have some economic effects at sea, but keeping track of all those different concepts while also trying to maneuver navies around straits and naval bases and enemy boats and also trying to load and unload transports is really a bit much.

I’m not sure how I feel about requiring naval bases to build escort ships like destroyers, and air bases to build ordinary fighters, especially since a minor factory can build elite troops, mobile artillery, and other high-tech goodies. I am also not in love with the “originally controlled factory” concept. If I control a territory, and I have a major factory and an airbase there, why can’t I build any kind of plane I like? I might prefer a system like this:

Military Base – 8 IPC cost, allows construction of 3 infantry – build anywhere – destroyed on capture
Minor Factory – 12 IPC cost, allows construction of up to 3 infantry, artillery, tank, transport, destroyer, submarine, fighter – build only in territories worth 2 or more – downgraded to military base on capture
Naval Base – 12 IPC cost, allows construction of up to 3 marines, transport, destroyer, submarine, escort carrier, carrier, cruiser, battleship – build only in territories worth 2 or more – suffers max. damage on capture
Air Base – 12 IPC cost, allows construction of up to 3 paratroopers, fighter, tac. bomber, strat. bomber, air transport – build only in territories worth 2 or more – suffers max damage on capture
Major Factory – 30 IPC cost, allows construction of up to 10 units of your choice – build only in territories worth 3 or more – downgraded to minor factory on capture

I was not sure how to enable the Canadian mod – is that a separate file that I missed?

In general I’m not sure how useful I’m going to be as a Global House Rules playtester; I found the whole experience pretty overwhelming. Having never played any version of Global before, trying to click and sort through the various new options on my own and then figure out how they work and whether there’s a bug was pretty challenging. E.g. if Russia can’t move into Northwest Persia without declaring war on Germany first, is that because of the normal G40 rules (whatever that means in the context of a game that had 3 alpha rulesets plus two semi-official balance mods) or because of something funky about the Spheres of Influence tech? I’m pretty sure Russia (as opposed to Britain) occupied Northwest Persia in the historical war, and I assumed that was the reason for splitting the territory up on the tripleA map.

[Black_Elk]

For the militarybase, I believe this is because allowing it to stack with regular factory units creates a situation where the militarybase produces 10 infantry rather than 3, which would require the limit of 3 infantry it to be player enforced (this is a tripleA issue as I understand it). But there is also a certain logic to the 1 ipc or less restriction, in that any land territory worth 2 or more ipcs can support a minor factory (which would produce 3 units at the same cost as an MB, but allows for units other than infantry) so in those cases the player would be better served by purchasing a minor than a military base. If there was no tripleA issue, then allowing an MB and a Minor in the same location would allow for potentially 6 hitpoints produced on a single tile worth 2 ipcs for a total investment of 24 ipcs in production. Not sure if that would be OP, but that fact that Barney couldn’t get it to work without overproducing beyond the proposed limit of 3 inf, made the decision simpler hehe.

I think what we are still missing is an HR that removes the island restriction for Minor Factories, allowing them to be placed anywhere on the map worth 2 or more ipcs.

The elite unit is a more generic all purpose infantry unit discussed at various points in this thread. It is airborne in that it can be lifted by the airtransport, but also has other abilities, one of which is +m1 when paired with a tank. It can also be transported on BBs and CAs in which case it is essentially treated like a marine. Not sure if Barney created the unit or ported it from another game, but its basically the jack of all trades type unit we kicked back and forth.

I think I ran into a similar issue with the defenseless bomber a few builds back, where I was seemingly able to capture the unit (as if it was infrastructure) when they were parked on the ground, but the bombers were then removed after the turn was concluded, so effectively auto-destroyed, just had to click through to the end for them to disappear. Which I agree was a little confusing.

The Factory Limited HR, which is the one you mentioned requiring bases to build certain units, is a little complex, I agree, but also kind of cool in that it makes bases much more significant to the purchasing potential of a given tile.
I also still like the idea of a base which doubles as a production unit for the given type (naval or air), but this one seems pretty interesting too, albeit pretty ambitious and fairly nuanced. I think Barney drafted it up.

The “all on” gamesave is a bit extreme. Just because we have the option to use an HR, or several HRs at once, doesn’t mean its necessarily the best thing for the gameplay. Personally I find that G40 is already quite involved, so I am more interested in limited modifications. Of the many HRs toggles currently available, there are really only a handful that would likely make it into my games on the regular (since my playgroup is more conservative.) But I still think the more options we have the better, so people can tweak it on the fly.

The Canada modification is currently in a separate gamefile that Simon put out (its linked a few pages back.)
But ultimately I think what would be cool is to have a single mapfile, that includes the materials to incorporate Canada into the game.

It is possible to change a lot about the game’s features simply with a new XML, provided that the gamefile package is extensive enough to allow for different things (like say adding a new player nation into the mix). Or similarly if you wanted more VCs or different VCs than the ones we have currently, that could be handled with a new simple text file. So players can do things with a simple files that wouldn’t require a redownload a 20+ mb map every time.

To that last point about playtesting, I think familiarity with the OOB rules is fairly important for being able to see which HRs are doing what, or similarly trying the HRs one at a time, instead of together, to see what they do. Otherwise it can be kind of overwhelming. And Global is already overwhelming to begin with haha. A similar system for 1942.2 would surely be a bit easier to parse, since the basic rules are less complex.

But this is like a dry run proof of concept, and G40 is popular, so I can see the advantage of trying it here. Probably the HR package we make for 1942.2 may be easier to get into, if you’re more familiar with that board than G40. I think 1942.2 is the game that probably needs it the most, though there is also something to be said about going big and trying to tackle some of this stuff for the more complex game, so we can see what is possible.

The restriction on Russian movement into Persia is indeed an OOB rule. Both Russia and the US have a lot of restrictions based on their initial political alignment (ostensibly neutral at the outset, though inevitably on the allied team once the Axis declare on them.) It’s probably all rather intense for a first time out. G40 is basically a big labyrinth of rules and exceptions to rules, and I imagine it would be kind of hard to parse the OOB stuff from what’s happening here with all these HR mods, if coming into it cold. That said, I think there are a few people still floating around, who may have been turned off by some aspects of G40 initially owing to its complexity, but might still like to play a more simplified type of A&A game on the big map.

Not sure how popular it would be, but in the future we might consider a toggle that just turns off certain OOB features of the game. For example a toggle that eliminates OOB Objectives, or the OOB convoy raiding vs coastal territories. Clearly that would tank the balance of the game, but if you wanted to replace those features with something meant to substitute rather than compliment the existing rules, it might be nice to have a way to just turn stuff off, and strip the game down.

For a first time out, if you just want to try playing an HR G40 mod that keeps pretty close to OOB, you might want to do something like only adding the extra VCs (edit add tech to changer). This doesn’t really introduce any new mechanics that might lend themselves towards confusion, just ups the economy somewhat. It might be more satisfying than learning how to play with the OOB file, which requires a substantial bid to the Allies.

[barney]

Good action Argothair.

Yea you have to open the zip and put the folder/file in your downloaded maps one. You obviously did that :) The MB placement was so you couldn’t put them in territories with factories to boost their production. Not sure If that’s what Elk was thinking, but that’s how they are for now. Must’ve messed up placement restrictions for Mexico/SW Mexico.

MB’s are kinda problematic because they allow up to 10 infantry builds as well as your normal stuff at factories. So it takes some PE, Player Enforced. I found it the most troublesome of all the techs from that standpoint. Busting out 3 dudes where you normally can’t is a nice feature though.

Not sure about the Greece thing. You don’t need Air Transports for Elite to attack/defend or anything. The transport just allows you to use them as paratroopers or air lifted in ncm.

Yea the defenseless bomber should have died. Not sure what’s up there.

Convoy zones can be a little confusing at first. It’s like trying to learn new national objectives. Basically if you can control one when your enemies collect their PUs, you’ll do at least -2 PU damage. You can also look in the lower left of the screen and it will say if the SZ is worth any PUs.

Yea one of the factory thing’s is so you can’t bust out high dollar units in newly built minor IC’s. Some people didn’t like the fact you could build BBs and Bombers in Norway for example. The main reason imo is to make bases more valuable. I’m not sure if it’s earlier in this thread or “The Worst National Objective Ever” one ( don’t have the link handy ), but there’s quite a bit of discussion on it there.

Having a minor factory being downgraded to a MB on capture seems pretty cool :)

Your playtest was good info Argo :). I found it quite useful. Yea, if you’ve never played G 40 before, I’m sure it was a bit of a mind trip. :) Russia can’t move into Persia unless they’re at war with Hitler or Mussolini.

Anyway, keep on Rock’in it. I imagine Elk will jump in soon. You guys should Rock a game :)

I see he already has :)

[barney]

yea the elite thing I got the idea from Midnight Express in his '39 setup. It was also discussed here ( I think it was here ) quite a bit. Japan had "SNLF"s and US had USMC. They were limited by amount. I gave them to UKP and ANZAC and then the kid suggested them for everybody. Tried hard to make them work as marines with artillery boost as well, but never quite worked. I always wanted paratroopers with a plane, don’t really dig the AB only thing, so they can jump too.

Also wittman wanted the US to be able to transport two mechs or a tank and a mech ( not sure on that ) and this allows two M2 units on one transport. At a cost but…:)

Yea MB kinda screws up how much you can place. Really gotta pay attention when it’s on. I think there’s a way to make it more efficient but would take a while to do.

[Black_Elk]

Yeah I think of all the HR adds, the MB is the most challenging right now, since it seems to mess with the production profiles of TTs with the other factories.

Maybe we should just nix it for now, until we get something that does the trick? Player enforced for the HR setting is one thing, but if just having it in there means you have to PE the normal factories that creates issues for the package.

As an alternative, maybe we just have a minor that can go anywhere worth 1 ipc or more. Could be a stop gap so we at least have one new production unit, and use the MB image for it. Or try the 3 tier option mentioned in Halifax.

I still think a 3 inf MB that can go anywhere is a cool idea, but it seems to be difficult to pull off.

[barney]

yeah might just bag it for now. Don’t think I got enough time to fix it. Should be able to have MBs still purchaseable/placeable/bombable. You’ll have to edit the dudes though. Or could make it another minor (with the MB image) and you’d have to PE infantry only. Would probably be the best for now

[barney]

Ok got the Military Base placement thing fixed. Works just like a minor so it will allow placement of 3 of any type units. So you’ll have to PE the infantry only.

Also they can still only be placed in 1 or 0 PU value territories.

https://www.sendspace.com/file/68hn0r

[baron Münchhausen]

@Baron:

However Barney must put an Anti-Sub & Aircraft Patrol @1 offense and defense.
So Fg and TcB will both have part in attack and defense.

Group 2 DD A1 D1 ADC1 DDC1 vs SS A2 D1
                                              SFR                        OOB
6 DD C5 vs 5 SS C6        77-79% DD win      60-63% DD win

5 SS C6 vs 6 DD C5        61-64% SS win        90% Sub win

6 DD A2 D2 C8 vs 8SS A2 D1 C6, it will be: 60% DD win
12 DD A2 D2 C8 vs 16SS A2 D1 C6, it will be: 63% DD win

8SS A2 D1 C6 vs 6DD A2 D2 C8, it will be: 88% Sub win
16SS A2 D1 C6 vs 12DD A2 D2 C8, it will be: 95% Sub win

This would be much simpler to test (and be in line with intended simpler SF rules):

This roster can work and is pretty near the OOB cost structure and remains probably much balanced within himself. Considering that weaker Subs (compared to this cheap 5 IPCs DD unit) have much survivability than ever.
ASA and ASD: Anti-Submarine Attack and Defense 1 pre-surprise strike phase attack @1 or defense @1

Here is the actual values of most basic units of G40 Redesign.
Do you think it can work on tabletop games?
Do you believe people can accept an anti-sub phase in naval combat, the same way AAA phase works in regular combat?
ASA and ASD: Anti-Submarine Attack and Defense 1 pre-surprise strike phase attack @1 or defense @1

Destroyer
A1 D1 ASA1/D1 M2-3 C5, 1 hit, 1D in Convoy SZ

Submarine
A2fs D1fs M2-3 C6, 1 hit, Stealth Move, No DD block, Submerge after ASA or ASD. 2D in Convoy SZ.

Transport (variant M3-4)
A0 D0 M2-3 C7, 0 hit, taken last, carry 1 Inf+1 any ground
Transport (reg combat variant)
A0 D1 M2-3 C8, 1 hit, carry 1 Inf+1 any ground

Cruiser (variant M3-4)
A3 D3 M2-3 C12, 1 hit, shorebombard@3, 1D in Convoy SZ
(Variant #2: AA @1 vs up to two planes, whichever the lesser)
Even if playing M3-4 Cruiser, AA variant is strongly suggested to balance with DD low cost and Sub unblocked capacity.

Carrier, fleet
A0 D2 M2-3 C16, 2 hits, carry 2 planes, no air operation if damaged

Battleship
A4 D4 M2-3 C20, 2 hits, shorebombard @4, 1D in Convoy SZ
Variant, carry 1 Marines A1-2 D1 M1 C3, +1A in amphibious assault,
for tabletop: may load 1 Infantry A1-2 D2 C3, +1A but forfeit shorebombardment.
(Variant #2: AA @1 vs up to two planes, whichever the lesser)
Even if playing BB with Marines carrying capacity, AA variant is strongly suggested to balance with DD low cost and Sub unblocked capacity.

Fighter (variant A2 D2, recommended unless play-tests proved otherwise)
A3 D4 M4-5 (M6 from AB as escort) C10, 1 hit SBR A1 D1, 1D in Convoy SZ,
Combined arms: gives +1A to TcB
Needs no DD to hit Subs

Tactical Bomber (variant C10, A1 D1 with Fg escort/intercept A2 D2)
A3-4 D3 ASA1/D1 M4-5  (M6 from AB for TBR only) C11, 1 hit, TBR A1 D0 dmg 1D6 on AB & NB, 1D in Convoy SZ
TcB with Fighter or Tank 1:1 received +1A
Needs no DD to hit Subs

Strategic Bomber (variant A1 D0 in SBR dogfight, not recommended)
A0 D0 M6-8 (M8 from AB for SBR only) C5, 0 hit, SBR 1 hit A0 dmg 1D6

Air Base
Giving +1M, +2M on SBR or TBR only,
up to three scramble units either Fg or TcB

Anti-Aircraft Artillery
A0 D1 M1 C4, roll 2@1 vs up to two aircraft, 1 roll max per aircraft
Defense 1 in regular combat, move as any ground unit in CM and NCM.

---

Here is additional units which are optional and require new sculpts to play with:

Militia
A0 D1 M1 C2, 1 hit

Marines
A1-2 D1 M1 C3, +1A in amphibious assault,
TP can carry 2 Marines, can load 1 on Battleship

Bunker
A0 D3 M0 C5 2 hits, requires 1 Inf, MI, Art, Elite, Marines or militia to work.
1 such unit must share same TTy to repair damage.

Mobile Artillery
A2 D2-3 M2 C5, can blitz but cannot give blitz to MI,
gives +1A to Inf or MI, paired 1:1
gets +1D paired 1:1 with Tank

Elite Infantry unit
A2 D2 M1-2 C5, can load 1 on Cruiser or Battleship, or 2 on TP,
gets +1M paired 1:1 with Tank and blitz with it,
Can load 1 on Air TP during move CM or NCM,

Air Transport
A0 D0 M5-6 C7, 1 hit, can load 1 Elite unit NCM or CM.

Escort Carrier
A1 D1 ASA1/D1 M2-3, C9, 1 hit, carry 1 Fg or TcB

Military Base
Cost 12 Allows to built up to three Infantry and can be built on 0 or 1 IPC TT or Island.
Has 6 damage points, not operational if 3 or more damage.
Built-in AAgun.

[baron Münchhausen]

If still trying to work with a 3 IPCs incremental cost structure, it could be interesting to keep DD A1 D1 C5 and Subs A2fs D1fs C6 and makes Cruiser C9, Carrier C12 and BB C15.
Adding no special ability like AA, it would be better balanced compared to DD and Sub.
So, from Triple A POV tests, it would require no big modification, just a single toggle with these 3 lower cost units. That way, it might easily recreate the Philadelphia Experiment roster.

Even more, it can be combined with M3 to CA and TP to give a special ability to Cruiser.
One good aspect of it is with no AA warship no need for AA phase in water, it is less complex to only focus on Anti-Sub rolls during this special pre-combat phase.

And, from Tabletop POV, pre-combat phase will be vs air on land, and vs Sub at sea.
Which makes sense and an easier contrasting concept to catch.

That way, it would be easier to observe if C10 TcBs and Fgs are becoming too weak compared to these other 3 warships. Compared to Advanced Shipyard tech, Cruiser is same cost, Carrier is 1 IPC cheaper (13 IPCs) and BB is 2 IPCs cheaper (17 IPCs).

Escort Carrier A1 D1 ASA1/D1 may then cost 8 IPCs to keep with 5…+3 incremental structure.

Another less radical possibility to still get easy 3 IPCs increment or 5, can be:
Cruiser C10, Carrier C15 and BB C18. However, it makes Cruiser and Battleship too much sub-optimal compared to DD A1 D1 ASA1/D1 C5.

Also, BBs at 15 IPCs will have no need to load Marines on board to be a competitive purchase.
TP will then be the only way to travel C3 Marines. Another simpler functionality which will please to many ones.
Damned, I really like such scaled cost for warship:
DD C5, SS C6, CA C9, CV C12, BB 15, TP C7 or C8, CVE C8  :-)
StB C5, Fg C10, TcB C10
Inf & Ms C3, MI C4, Art C4, AAA C4, MArt C5, Bunker C5, Tank C6