G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

[baron Münchhausen]

Method: Defender gets to soak free hits vs. purely amphibious attacks.

Narvik suggested in this thread to apply 1914 preemptive Artillery strike against invaders:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36518.msg1473295#msg1473295

For amphibious assault bonus,
I look at DK’s video and thread :
https://youtu.be/R_Jb5RxBuso

@Der:

@Make_It_Round:

In actuality, even with the extensive defensive preparations of the Japanese, the casualties they inflicted upon the Americans were rarely better than 30-50% of their own; often, the Japanese would suffer 10x US casualty rates in these encounters.

Yes, but this was in the face of OVERWHELMING US firepower. For instance, there were 18 US carriers around Okinawa. Not to mention all the BBs, cruisers, and other sea units. If you bring that much firepower you should win easily, even with hit chips. But one battleship and one transport with two infantry on it should not be able to take an island with fanatic Japanese defenders on it without getting hurt badly or repelled.

@Make_It_Round:

Your rule will, inevitably, favor one side over the other. The Axis, as an early-game attacker, will be punished by it when they try to equalize their IPCs, and the Allies, as a late-game attacker, will be punished by it when they go in for the final kill. Overall, my feeling is that this will harm the Axis far more than the Allies, by taking the edge off of their attacks in a game wherein they already seem to be systematically disadvantaged (AA40 v.3.9)… This is my main beef with it.

I haven’t extensively gametested this, and am working with an AA 1942 map, but I suspect it will even out or even help the Axis. At the beginning of the game the Axis are generally trying to expand over land anyway - trying to take out Russia and China. Operation Torch would be delayed a couple of rounds. (in the AA '42 setup now the USA can take West Africa rather easily in the first round!) The Atlantic wall would become a real challenge for the Allies. In short, I think Germany and Japan would benefit from it, as they wouldn’t have to “watch their back” so much while concentrating on China and Russia.

As for buying entrenchment, no chips are ever put on the map in my idea. The chips are just put on the battleboard as a consequence of making a pure amphibious assault without land support. They are a penalty to the attacker, not an advantage to the defender that can be bought. The chips are the deep water, the pounding surf, the water soaked equipment, the seasickness, the confusion and the wide open beach. If a landing force is defeated and there are still chips left, the chips just go back in the tray. If the island is attacked again next turn, it resets to five chips again, because the chips represent the attackers ineffectiveness, not the defensers effectiveness.

3 or 5 soak free tokens is very arbitrary and non-linear per pure amphib.
My first idea would be to add 1 hit free per ground unit defending, up to 3 hits, if purely amphibious assault.
Do you think this might also :
Goal: Encourage Germany to defend the Atlantic Wall in Western Europe?

However, this is great on tabletop but not easy done in Triple A.

This thread is about Amphibious Assault and ways to make it harder.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38685.msg1588717#msg1588717

@Der:

In the current versions of Axis and Allies historically difficult places to attack like Gibraltar and Leningrad are treated like any other territory. I believe this can be fixed. I also believe that amphibious assaults are too easy for the attacker - in fact they are easier than regular land battles, because of the free shots BBs and CAs get to make without return fire.

I’ve fleshed out some rules here for entrenchment which combine my former posts about entrenchment and the amphibious assault bonus. I think these rules are simple and reasonable, and can help make the any edition of the game more realistic. These brown “dirt” chips can be ordered from HBG - I printed the “E” stickers for them. I was going to use a shovel pic but couldn’t find one that looked right at that scale. The chips are nice and convenient because you can just add another to the top of the stack instead of sliding one under a different symbol.

ENTRENCHMENT

Introduction:
• Brown colored chips in the game marked with an “E” represent
entrenchment.Entrenchment represents any trenches, tunnels, barbed wire,
concrete barriers, etc. built and used by infantry in order to help protect
defending units. Entrenchment has no defense value - it only helps by absorbing
hits meant for defending land units.

• During the opening phase of his turn, each player may place one entrenchment
chip on the map in any  infantry occupied land zone he currently owns. 
Entrenchment chips cannot be moved once placed. The maximum placed
entrenchment level for any one territory is 5.

Resolving Battle:
• When defending infantry are involved, place any entrenchment chips that are in
the same territory in the entrenchment area on the battleboard. When suffering a
hit during an attack, you may choose an entrenchment chip as a casualty instead
of a land unit. (This works with pre-invasion ship bombardments also. You can
choose an entrenchment chip as the casualty.) Entrenchment chips cannot be
used in the battle if there are no defending infantry.

• Units other than infantry cannot make use of entrenchment.  In this case, if the
attacker wins, he would get to keep the unmanned entrenchment for himself.
After a battle with entrenchment concludes and the attacker wins, 1/2 of the
defenders’ placed entrenchment is restored to the attacker, rounded down. This
represents the surviving tunnels and trenches that the enemy can now use for
himself.

Amphibious Assaults: 
• All Units (not just infantry) defending against a pure amphibious assault get a
bonus of 3 entrenchment chips placed on the battleboard during the battle.
(these bonus chips are not kept on the map like the regular placed chips and last
only for that battle) These bonus chips represent the extra difficulty and
disorganization attackers have while wading in to the beach during such battles.
(No bonus is allowed if the Amphibious assault is combined with an attack from
an adjacent land zone.) This means a fully entrenched territory facing a pure
amphibious assault could theoretically be entrenched to a maximum of 8.
   
• If desired, all entrenchment chips in territories that you have owned since the
beginning of your turn can be removed during the noncombat phase.
 
• Historically Fortified zones of the map like Gibraltar may begin the game with
certain levels of entrenchment. Setup Entrenchment levels:
 
  - Gibraltar: 3
  - Leningrad: 3
  - Caucasus: 3
  - Moscow: 2

[baron Münchhausen]

@Young:

This may be a totally different direction of thought, but what if Cruisers and Aircraft carriers required 2 hits to sink, and Battleships required 3 hits to sink.

Here, I want to explore what can be 2 hits Cruiser and 3 hits Battleship configuration if Fighter are at 8 IPCs.

ASAD: Anti-Submarine Attack 1 Defense 1 pre-surprise strike phase attack def @1

Air Base giving +2M, up to three scramble either Fg or TcB

Second version, 2 planes Carrier, 2 hits Cruiser and 3 hits BB, simpler interactions and 5-6-9-12-15-18 cost structure:

Transport, defenseless
A0 D0 M3 C7, 0 hit,
taken last, carry 1 Inf+1 any ground

Transport and Destroyer A2 D2 C13, 1 hit
Offense & Defense factor:
36*(2/13^2) = 0.43

Transport working as warship (Military Armed TP being escorted by a few DEs)
A0 D1 M3 C9, 1 hit,
carry 1 Inf or MI +1 any ground unit (might help faster US deployment: MI+Tk)

Defense factor:
36*(1/9^2) = 0.44

Submarine
A2fs D1fs M2 C5, 1 hit,
Stealth Move, No DD block, may Submerge after ASAD.
2Ds in Convoy SZ

Offense:
36*(2/5^2) = 2.88
36*(3/5^2) = surprise strike 4.32
Defense:
36*(1/5^2) = 1.44
36*(1.33/5^2) = surprise strike 1.92

Destroyer
A2 D2 M2 C6, 1 hit,
ASA1D1,
1D in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36*(2/6^2) = 2.00

Escort Carrier (optional)
A0 D2 M2 C9, 1 hit,
ASA1D1 carry 1 plane,
No dice in Convoy SZ

Offense factor:
36*(0/9^2) = 0.00
Defense factor:
36*(2/9^2) = 0.89

Escort Carrier and 1 Fighter
A3 D6 M2 C17, 2 hits,
ASA1D1 carry 1 plane,
Offence:
36* (3/2)/(17/2)^2 = 0.75
Defence:
36* (6/2)/(17/2)^2 = 1.50

Cruiser
A3 D3 M3 C12, 2 hits,
Shorebombard @3,
1D in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36* 3 / (12^2) * 2.618034 = 1.96

Carrier
A0 D2 M2 C15, 2 hits,
carry 2 planes, damaged Carrier carry no plane
No dice in Convoy SZ

Offense factor:
36*[0/ (15^2)] * 2.618034 = 0.00
Defense factor:
36*[2/ (15^2)] * 2.618034 = 0.84

G40 Carrier A0 D2 C15, 2 hits with 2 Fgs A6 D8 C16, 2 hits
Offense factor:
   6/2  C31/2   2 additionnals hit/2
36*[3/ (15.5^2)] * 2.618034 = 1.18

Defense factor:
   10/2  C31/2  2 additionnals hit/2
36*[5/ (15.5^2)] * 2.618034 = 1.96

10/4  C31/4  1 additionnal hit considered as whole unit
36*[2.5/ (7.75^2)]  = 1.50
Until further investigation, I believe this average is better: (1.96+1.50)/2= 1.73
Or avg Defence would give (0.84+2.25+2.25) = 1.78

G40 Carrier A0 D2 C15, 2 hits with 1 Fg+1 TcB A7 D7 C18, 2 hits
Offense factor:
   7/2  C33/2   2 additionnals hit/2
36*[3.5/ (16.5^2)] * 2.618034 = 1.21

Defense factor:
   9/2  C33/2  2 additionnals hit/2
36*[4.5/ (16.5^2)] * 2.618034 = 1.56

9/4  C33/4  1 additionnal hit considered as whole unit
36*[2.25/ (8.25^2)]  = 1.19

average is better: (1.56+1.19)/2= 1.38
Or avg Defence would give (0.84+2.25+1.08) = 1.39

Battleship
A4 D4 M2 C18, 3 hits,
Shorebombard @4,
1D in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36* 4 / (18^2)* (1+2*1.618034) = 1.88

Strategic Bomber
A0 D0 M6-8 C5, 0 hit,
SBR 1 hit A1 dmg 1D6

Offense SBR only:
36*(1/5^2) = 1.44

Fighter
A3 D4 M4-6 C8, 1 hit, gives +1A to TcB if paired 1:1
SBR A2 D2,
Can hit Sub without Destroyer presence
2Ds in Convoy SZ

Offense factor:
36*(3/8^2) = 1.69
Defense factor:
36*(4/8^2) = 2.25

Offense & Defense factor SBR:
36*(2/8^2)= 1.125

Tactical Bomber
A3-4 D3 M4-6 C10, 1 hit, get +1A if paired 1:1 with Fg or Tank
TBR A1 D1, dmg 1D6,
ASA1D1, can hit Sub without Destroyer presence
2Ds in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36*(3/10^2) = 1.08

Offense & Defense factor SBR:
36*(1/10^2)= 0.36

Anti-aircraft Artillery
A0 D1* M1 C4, 1 hit,

• @1 vs up to 3 planes, 1 roll per plane max, per combat.
  It is preemptive shot.
  36*(1.33/4^2) = surprise strike 3.00 per plane for first combat round only.

Tactical Bomber & Tank A7 D6 C16, 2 hits
Offense factor:
36*(3.5/8^2) = 1.97
Defense factor:
36*(3/8^2)= 1.69

Tactical Bomber & Fighter A7 D7 C18, 2 hits
Offense factor:
36*(3.5/9^2) = 1.56
Defense factor:
36*(3.5/9^2)= 1.56

---

It seems balanced between warships and such 8 IPCs Fighter.

Tactical bomber seems a bit weaker but it has Anti-Sub Attack and Defense.
In addition, it can be possible to introduce a special targeting against warships for tactical bomber in naval combat when playing F-2-F on boardgame.
Here is how I see the procedure: after Anti-Sub phase and Sub surprise strike phase, tactical roll first.
Any hits are allocated on a given warship unit according to TacBs owner’s choice.
Then all other units rolls.

This is more functional since Cruiser, Battleship and Carrier have multiple hits and make Subs rolls and TcBs less effective.

---

Edit: This make for a better match between naval and air units.
However, one issue is about 6 IPCs Tank A3 D3 M2 and other land units.

Lowering Fighter A3 D4 M4 to 8 IPCs, make them much more interesting as versatile and highly mobile unit.
In such scenario, maybe to compensate: AAA should cost only 3 IPCs.
That way, higher mobility and strength will be compensate by an higher vulnerability to AAA roll compared to Tank.
In this case, AAA strength would be:
36*(1.33/3^2) = surprise strike 5.33 against only plane and 1 roll per plane for first combat round only.

[baron Münchhausen]

This might come in handy, from Variant forum…
@Ben_D:

Turn Order

Production and Research Phase:

• (production is as explained in the GW36 rule manual).

• (research is as explained on the National Reference Sheet).

---

Combat Movement Phase:

• 1. Air Combat Movement Rounds:

  • 1.1 Flying to the destination:

    • 1.1.1 The attacker declares which territories or sea zones the aircraft is/are going through.

    • 1.1.2 Defending Combat Air Patrol fighters in sea zones may intercept at 1D12@3 once each, or @4 once each with Jet technology.  Attacking/escorting fighters may roll 1D12@3
      once each, or @4 once each with Jet technology, and all bomber aircraft types roll 1D12@2 once each versus defending aircraft units.  Casualties are removed immediately and
      combat ceases after one round.

    • 1.1.2 Defending fighters on airbases and/or aircraft carriers (both with the RADAR technology) may scramble to intercept and roll 1D12@3 once each or @4 once each with Jet
      Technology. Attacking/escorting fighters may roll 1D12@3 once each, or @4 once each with Jet technology, and all attacking bomber aircraft types roll 1D12@2 once each versus
      defending aircraft units.  Casualties are removed immediately and combat ceases after one interception round.

    • 1.1.3 Defending anti-aircraft guns may fire once (1D12@3 once each, or @4 once each with RADAR technology) at aircraft units flying over the territory.  Attacking/escorting fighters
      and all attacking bomber aircraft types may not fire back.  Casualties are removed immediately and combat ceases after one round.

    • 1.2 Arriving at the destination:

      • 1.2.1 Defending anti-aircraft guns may fire once (3D12@3 once each, or @4 once each with RADAR technology) pre-emptively at attacking aircraft units arriving at the territory.
        Attacking/escorting fighters and all attacking bomber types may not fire back when pre-emptive shots are made.  Casualties are removed immediately.  Defending anti-aircraft
        guns that fire at this point do not fire at all on the first Full Combat Round that proceeds this Combat Movement Round.

      • 1.2.2 Defending fighters and tactical bombers may scramble from territories containing air bases and/or aircraft carriers with the RADAR technology to adjacent territories or sea
        zones.

      • 2. Land Combat Movement:

        • 2.1 (As explained in the National Reference Sheet).

          • Should I cover our blitzkrieg rules?  They’re in the reference sheets I think: better than original rules.  I mention this because this also involves aircraft.

          ---

          Combat Phase:

          • 3. Full Combat Rounds:

            • 3.1 Air Combat round (meant for engaging military units):

              • 3.1.1 Attacking fighters roll 1D12@6 once each or 1D12@8 with Jet technology once each versus defending aircraft units.  The defender assigns casualties for defending aircraft.

              • 3.1.2 Defending fighters roll 1D12@6 once each or 1D12@8 with Jet technology once each versus attacking aircraft units.  The attacker assigns casualties for attacking aircraft.

              • 3.1.3 Attacking bomber aircraft that have been assigned as casualties roll 1D12@2 once each versus defending fighters (never other bomber aircraft).

              • 3.1.4 Defending bomber aircraft that have been assigned as casualties roll 1D12@2 once each versus attacking fighters (never other bomber aircraft).

              • 3.1.5 All aircraft casualties at this point are removed.

              • 3.1.6 The attacker may also chose to retreat a portion of or all aircraft (refer to the Retreat section for more information).  The defending fighters may chase if conditions are met
                (refer to the Chase/routing section for more information).

              • 3.1.7 The defender may also chose to retreat a portion of or all aircraft.  Refer to the Retreat section for more information.  The attacking fighters may chase if conditions are met
                (refer to the Chase/routing section for more information).

              • 3.1.8 If the Full Combat Round has finished, all attacking aircraft units may proceed to land in the Non-Combat Phase, and retreating/scrambled defending aircraft units may land in
                the Non-Combat Phase if they’re able to.

              • 3.1 Strategic Bombing Combat Rounds (meant for devastation to industry and base utility):

                • 3.1.1 Interception:

                  • Defending fighters on airbases in the targeted territory, adjacent territories containing airbases and/or on aircraft carriers (with the RADAR technology) in sea zones adjacent to
                    the target territory may scramble to intercept at 1D12@3 once each or @4 once each with Jet technology. Attacking/escorting fighters may roll 1D12@3 once each, or @4 once
                    each with Jet technology, and all attacking bomber aircraft types roll 1D12@2 once each.  Casualties are removed immediately after and combat ceases after one round.

                  • Defending facilities may fire once (D12@3 or @4 with RADAR technology at each attacking bomber aircraft targeting the facility).  Casualties are removed immediately after and
                    combat ceases after one round.

                  • 3.1.2 Strategic Bombing:

                    • Attacking tactical bombers roll 1D6 to determine the number of damage on a targeted facility.

                    • Attacking naval bombers roll 1D6 to determine the number of damage on a targeted facility.

                    • Attacking heavy bombers roll 2D6 to determine the number of damage on a targeted facility.

                    • Attacking strategic bombers roll 3D6 to determine the number of damage on a targeted facility.

                    • 3.1.3 The Strategic Bombing mission/s end/s and all aircraft participating in the strategic bombing round/s proceed to land in the Non-Combat phase.

                      • 3.2 Land and/or Naval Combat round:

                        • 3.2.1 Attacking aircraft units that have not rolled any combat dice in the Air Combat round may fire in the Land/Naval combat round:

                          • Attacking tactical bombers roll 1D12@7 once each versus defending land units OR 1D12@4 once each versus defending naval units.

                          • Attacking naval bombers roll 1D12@4 once each versus defending land units OR 1D12@6 once each versus defending naval units.

                          • Attacking heavy bombers roll 3D12@2 once each versus defending land units OR 3D12@1 once each versus defending naval units.

                          • Attacking strategic bombers roll 5D12@2 once each versus defending land units OR 5D12@1 once each versus defending naval units.

                          • Attacking fighters roll 1D12@2 once each versus defending land units OR defending naval units.

                          • 3.2.2 Attacking anti-aircraft guns roll 1D12@3 (1D12@4 with RADAR technology) versus defending aircraft or 1D12@2 (1D12@3 with RADAR technology) versus defending aircraft
                            that have retreated in the Air Combat round.[/lu]

                            • Any hits scored on defending aircraft units by attacking anti-aircraft guns are not considered pre-emptive while attacking on any combat round.

                            • Defending anti-aircraft guns may be assigned as casualties before other land units if there are attacking aircraft units present in the battle (the exception is the German Flak 88 if
                              it is used as artillery, not AA).

                            • 3.2.3 Attacking land units (excluding anti-aircraft guns) may engage defending air units:

                              • at the value of 1D12@2 instead of defending land units during a combat round at a ratio of 2 land units per 1 air unit when defending land units are present.

                              • that are stationed in the contested territory at the value of 1D12@2 for only one combat round if there are no defending land units in the combat round.  Combat ceases after one
                                combat round and the attacker may take the territory if there are attacking land units that have survived combat.  The defending aircraft units must then retreat as described under
                                the applicable section under the Retreating mechanics.

                              • that have scrambled from an adjacent territory’s air base at the value of 1D12@2 (no ratio) for an unlimited amount of combat rounds if there are no defending land units.

                              • at the value of 1D12@1 vs defending aircraft units that have retreated in the Air Combat round instead of defending land units during a combat round at a ratio of 2 land units
                                units per 1 air unit when defending land units are present.

                              • at the value of 1D12@1 vs defending aircraft units that have retreated in the Air Combat round with no ratio for an unlimited amount of combat rounds if there are no defending
                                land units.

                              • 3.2.4 Defending aircraft units that have not rolled any combat dice in the Air Combat round may fire in the Land/Naval combat round.

                                • Defending tactical bombers roll 1D12@7 once each versus attacking land units OR 1D12@4 once each versus attacking naval units.

                                • Defending naval bombers roll 1D12@4 once each versus attacking land units OR 1D12@6 once each versus attacking naval units.

                                • Defending heavy bombers roll 3D12@2 once each versus attacking land units OR 3D12@1 once each versus attacking naval units.

                                • Defending strategic bombers roll 5D12@2 once each versus attacking land units OR 5D12@1 once each versus attacking naval units.

                                • Defending fighters roll 1D12@2 once each versus attacking land units OR attacking naval units.

                                • 3.2.5 Defending anti-aircraft guns roll 1D12@3 or 1D12@4 with RADAR technology versus attacking aircraft starting on the second Combat Round.

                                  • Any hits scored on attacking aircraft units by defending anti-aircraft guns on the second combat round and combat rounds thereafter are not considered pre-emptive.

                                  • Attacking anti-aircraft guns may be assigned as casualties before other land units if there are defending aircraft present in the battle (the exception is the German Flak 88 if it is
                                    used as artillery, not AA).

                                  • 3.2.6 Defending land units (excluding anti-aircraft guns) may engage attacking air units:

                                    • at the value of 1D12@2 instead of land units during a combat round at a ratio of 2 land units per 1 air unit when attacking land units are present.

                                    • at the value of 1D12@3 if there are no attacking land units and only attacking aircraft units in the combat round (no ratio).

                                    • at the value of 1D12@1 vs attacking aircraft units that have retreated in the Air Combat round instead of attacking land units during a combat round at a ratio of 2 land units
                                      per 1 air unit when attacking land units are present.

                                    • at the value of 1D12@1 vs attacking aircraft units that have retreated in the Air Combat round with no ratio for an unlimited amount of combat rounds if there are no attacking
                                      land units.

                                    • 3.2.7 Attacking and defending units that are assigned as casualties are removed from the board.

                                    • Note: Submarines are considered to be revealed to all units if they fire (roll) on a combat round, therefore making submarines able to suffer casualties from any air or naval unit.  I
                                      figured this had to be written down because of past experiences of lacking clarification.

                                    ---

                                    Mechanics section

                                    • Retreating mechanics (for aircraft):

                                      • Attacking fighters, jet fighters, tactical bombers and naval bombers may chose to retreat up the amount of movement they have left after the combat round.  A sea zone must contain
                                        a friendly aircraft carrier capable of being in the sea zone that has available space if the aircraft unit is landing in a sea zone.  Aircraft carriers may provide a landing area by moving
                                        into the sea zone in the Non-Combat Phase, when planes land.  Long Range Aircraft technology permits retreating up to a maximum 4 territories/sea zones away (5 from an airbase) for
                                        attacking fighters, jet fighters, and tactical bombers, and 5 away (6 from an airbase) for naval bombers.

                                      • Attacking heavy and strategic bombers may chose to retreat up the amount of movement they have left after the combat round.  Long Range Aircraft technology permits retreating up
                                        to 7 territories/sea zones (8 from an airbase) away for attacking heavy and strategic bombers.

                                      • Defending fighters, jet fighters and tactical bombers may chose to retreat up to 2 territories, or two sea zones, or a combination of a territory and a sea zone away (or 3 from an
                                        airbase).  A sea zone must contain a friendly aircraft carrier that has available space if the aircraft unit is landing in a sea zone. Aircraft carriers may provide a landing area by moving
                                        into the sea zone in the Non-Combat Phase, when planes land.  Long Range Aircraft technology permits retreating up to 3 territories/sea zones away (remains at 3 from an airbase) for
                                        defending fighters, jet fighters, tactical bombers and naval bombers. If there are no friendly territories or friendly aircraft carriers available for landing, the aircraft is/are destroyed.

                                      • Defending heavy and strategic bombers may chose to retreat up to 3 territories, or two sea zones, or a combination of a territory and a sea zone away (or 4 from an airbase).  Long
                                        Range Aircraft technology permits retreating up to 4 territories/sea zones (remains at 4 from an airbase) away for defending heavy and strategic bombers.

                                      • Chasing (or routing, or whatever name, I don’t know…) mechanics:

                                        • If all attacking aircraft units retreat, defending fighters or jet fighters may choose to chase all attacking aircraft by using interception mechanics; 1D12@3, or 1D12@4 for jet
                                          fighters only once each.  Remove all assigned casualties from the board after one chasing round.

                                        • Retreating fighters and jet fighters forfeit combat rolls.

                                        • Retreating bomber aircraft that have been assigned as casualties as a result of chasing may roll 1D12@2 once each versus chasing fighters and/or jet fighters

                                        • If all defending aircraft units retreat, attacking fighters or jet fighters may choose to chase all attacking aircraft by using mechanics similar to interception; 1D12@3, or
                                          1D12@4 for jet fighters only once each.  Remove all assigned casualties from the board after one chasing round.

                                        • Retreating fighters and jet fighters forfeit combat rolls.

                                        • Retreating bomber aircraft that have been assigned as casualties as a result of chasing may roll 1D12@2 once each versus chasing fighters and/or jet fighters.

                                        • If only a portion of the attacking or defending aircraft units have retreated and fighters remain on both sides, chasing may not occur.

                                        ---

                                        Non-Combat Phase

                                        • Aircraft that are landing are subject to section 1.1 of the Air Combat Movement Rounds under the Combat Movement Phase.

[baron Münchhausen]

@Baron:

Here, I want to explore what can be 2 hits Cruiser and 3 hits Battleship configuration if Fighter are at 8 IPCs.

ASAD: Anti-Submarine Attack 1 Defense 1 pre-surprise strike phase attack def @1

Air Base giving +2M, up to three scramble either Fg or TcB

Second version, 2 planes Carrier, 2 hits Cruiser and 3 hits BB, simpler interactions and 5-6-9-12-15-18 cost structure:

Transport, defenseless
A0 D0 M3 C7, 0 hit,
taken last, carry 1 Inf+1 any ground

Transport and Destroyer A2 D2 C13, 1 hit
Offense & Defense factor:
36*(2/13^2) = 0.43

Transport working as warship (Military Armed TP being escorted by a few DEs)
A0 D1 M3 C9, 1 hit,
carry 1 Inf or MI +1 any ground unit (might help faster US deployment: MI+Tk)

Defense factor:
36*(1/9^2) = 0.44

Submarine
A2fs D1fs M2 C5, 1 hit,
Stealth Move, No DD block, may Submerge after ASAD.
2Ds in Convoy SZ

Offense:
36*(2/5^2) = 2.88
36*(3/5^2) = surprise strike 4.32
Defense:
36*(1/5^2) = 1.44
36*(1.33/5^2) = surprise strike 1.92

Destroyer
A2 D2 M2 C6, 1 hit,
ASA1D1,
1D in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36*(2/6^2) = 2.00

Escort Carrier (optional)
A0 D2 M2 C9, 1 hit,
ASA1D1 carry 1 plane,
No dice in Convoy SZ

Offense factor:
36*(0/9^2) = 0.00
Defense factor:
36*(2/9^2) = 0.89

Escort Carrier and 1 Fighter
A3 D6 M2 C17, 2 hits,
ASA1D1 carry 1 plane,
Offence:
36* (3/2)/(17/2)^2 = 0.75
Defence:
36* (6/2)/(17/2)^2 = 1.50

Cruiser
A3 D3 M3 C12, 2 hits,
Shorebombard @3,
1D in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36* 3 / (12^2) * 2.618034 = 1.96

Carrier
A0 D2 M2 C15, 2 hits,
carry 2 planes, damaged Carrier carry no plane
No dice in Convoy SZ

Offense factor:
36*[0/ (15^2)] * 2.618034 = 0.00
Defense factor:
36*[2/ (15^2)] * 2.618034 = 0.84

G40 Carrier A0 D2 C15, 2 hits with 2 Fgs A6 D8 C16, 2 hits
Offense factor:
   6/2  C31/2   2 additionnals hit/2
36*[3/ (15.5^2)] * 2.618034 = 1.18

Defense factor:
   10/2  C31/2  2 additionnals hit/2
36*[5/ (15.5^2)] * 2.618034 = 1.96

10/4  C31/4  1 additionnal hit considered as whole unit
36*[2.5/ (7.75^2)]  = 1.50
Until further investigation, I believe this average is better: (1.96+1.50)/2= 1.73
Or avg Defence would give (0.84+2.25+2.25) = 1.78

G40 Carrier A0 D2 C15, 2 hits with 1 Fg+1 TcB A7 D7 C18, 2 hits
Offense factor:
   7/2  C33/2   2 additionnals hit/2
36*[3.5/ (16.5^2)] * 2.618034 = 1.21

Defense factor:
   9/2  C33/2  2 additionnals hit/2
36*[4.5/ (16.5^2)] * 2.618034 = 1.56

9/4  C33/4  1 additionnal hit considered as whole unit
36*[2.25/ (8.25^2)]  = 1.19

average is better: (1.56+1.19)/2= 1.38
Or avg Defence would give (0.84+2.25+1.08) = 1.39

Battleship
A4 D4 M2 C18, 3 hits,
Shorebombard @4,
1D in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36* 4 / (18^2)* (1+2*1.618034) = 1.88

Strategic Bomber
A0 D0 M6-8 C5, 0 hit,
SBR 1 hit A1 dmg 1D6

Offense SBR only:
36*(1/5^2) = 1.44

Fighter
A3 D4 M4-6 C8, 1 hit, gives +1A to TcB if paired 1:1
SBR A2 D2,
Can hit Sub without Destroyer presence
2Ds in Convoy SZ

Offense factor:
36*(3/8^2) = 1.69
Defense factor:
36*(4/8^2) = 2.25

Offense & Defense factor SBR:
36*(2/8^2)= 1.125

Tactical Bomber
A3-4 D3 M4-6 C10, 1 hit, get +1A if paired 1:1 with Fg or Tank
TBR A1 D1, dmg 1D6,
ASA1D1, can hit Sub without Destroyer presence
2Ds in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36*(3/10^2) = 1.08

Offense & Defense factor SBR:
36*(1/10^2)= 0.36

Anti-aircraft Artillery
A0 D1* M1 C4, 1 hit,

• @1 vs up to 3 planes, 1 roll per plane max, per combat.
  It is preemptive shot.
  36*(1.33/4^2) = surprise strike 3.00 per plane for first combat round only.

Tactical Bomber & Tank A7 D6 C16, 2 hits
Offense factor:
36*(3.5/8^2) = 1.97
Defense factor:
36*(3/8^2)= 1.69

Tactical Bomber & Fighter A7 D7 C18, 2 hits
Offense factor:
36*(3.5/9^2) = 1.56
Defense factor:
36*(3.5/9^2)= 1.56

---

It seems balanced between warships and such 8 IPCs Fighter.

Tactical bomber seems a bit weaker but it has Anti-Sub Attack and Defense.
In addition, it can be possible to introduce a special targeting against warships for tactical bomber in naval combat when playing F-2-F on boardgame.
Here is how I see the procedure: after Anti-Sub phase and Sub surprise strike phase, tactical roll first.
Any hits are allocated on a given warship unit according to TacBs owner’s choice.
Then all other units rolls.

This is more functional since Cruiser, Battleship and Carrier have multiple hits and make Subs rolls and TcBs less effective.

Since 10 IPCs TcBs are a bit weaker in this new configuration against 8 IPCs Fg and 2 hits Naval units, I wonder if there is some tactical impact to the game or plain unhistorical factor if combined arms is also allowed in defense?

Fighter
A3 D4 M4-6 C8, 1 hit, gives +1A/D to TcB if paired 1:1
SBR A2 D2,
Can hit Sub without Destroyer presence
2Ds in Convoy SZ

Offense factor:
36*(3/8^2) = 1.69
Defense factor:
36*(4/8^2) = 2.25

Offense & Defense factor SBR:
36*(2/8^2)= 1.125

Tactical Bomber
A3-4 D3-4 M4-6 C10, 1 hit, get +1A/D if paired 1:1 with Fg or Tank
TBR A1 D1, dmg 1D6,
ASA1D1, can hit Sub without Destroyer presence
2Ds in Convoy SZ

Offense & Defense factor:
36*(3/10^2) = 1.08

Offense & Defense factor SBR:
36*(1/10^2)= 0.36

Tactical Bomber & Tank A7 D7 C16, 2 hits
Offense & Defense factor:
36*(3.5/8^2) = 1.97
Defense factor:
36*(3/8^2)= 1.69

Tactical Bomber & Fighter A7 D8 C18, 2 hits
Offense & Defense factor:
36*(3.5/9^2) = 1.56
Defense factor:
36*(4/9^2)= 1.78

For Carrier defense, both Fg+Fg (C16) and TcB+Fg (C18) would provide 8 defense points but cost is not the same.
With 2 Fgs you save 2 IPCs. Keeping Fgs far more cost efficient for defense (2.25 vs 1.78) and still on par for offense (1.69 vs 1.56).

The only bonus TcB get is for Anti-Sub attack and defense which might sink Sub before doing any damage.

---

@toblerone77:

@Baron:

@Razor:

@Baron:

The usual situation of casualty picking in A&A is aircrafts hitting ground targets, hence a Stuka is far more effective than a Spitfire to destroy a tank. And I should add that a Helldiver TcB is far better than a Hellcat Fgt to destroy a IJN Musashi Battleship.

Even if your facts are correct, and I agree with you most of the time, the trick will be to make a HR that is so smooth, elegant and simple, that the casual A&A player that happens to be in your basement, agree to play by it, and not the lame OOB rulebook.

Combat in the real world seems to have some kind of sequenced fire phases, where specialized weapon systems can target specific units, and kill them before they can return fire. A Battleship have big long range guns, and can sink a Cruiser before it reach the range to shoot back. The artillery barrage loop shells into the infantry trench, and there is no way the infantry can kill that artillery. Heavy Bombers can carpet bomb infantry from high altitude and the infantry have no way to defend against it.

But then it will not longer be A&A

You are describing tactical situations which need to be translated somehow in a Strategical game.
I agree on this:
“the trick will be to make a HR that is so smooth, elegant and simple, that the casual A&A player that happens to be in your basement, agree to play by it, and not the lame OOB rulebook.”

It is not an easy task, very often as I revised some old ideas I saw easily how far I am from it.
But, sometimes a simpler solution arise. And I’m the most happy man because of the simplest joy of the discovery. Â :-D

That is easily done if you leave the stats OOB, except allow TBs to defend at +1 when paired with a fighter. You could even do this with the StB if you really wanted to.

---

Also, with lower cost, 20% lower for Fg and 10% for TcB, it makes sense to compensate, by an additional Dogfight phase prior to the main battle, this increase in strength compared to ground units which are far less versatile and mobile.

AAA would be part of it and would allow defender to still protect his air fleet against invaders.

For further thinking on dogfight phase and get a reference to a Tactical Bomber thread:

@Baron:

@knp7765:

Okay, I think I see Baron’s problem with the attack/defense values of fighters, tac bombers and strat bombers in relation to the difference between air to air combat versus air units attacking ground targets. Yeah, if you look at one unit versus one other unit, perhaps the attack/defense values may not make as much sense in some cases. For example, a tac bomber or strat bomber attacking @ 4 against a fighter defending @ 4 does seem kind of ludicrous. Of course it seems equally ludicrous to think of an infantry defending @ 2 taking out a strategic bomber.
The problem is Axis & Allies had to provide a general attack and defense system to make the game playable and somewhat simple. To say unit A can attack unit B at this value but it can attack unit C at a different value and so on would simply make the combat too complicated and probably scare away all but the most hard core gamers.
Also, I’ve got to say increasing a tac bomber’s defense to 4 and lowering a fighter’s defense to 3 is just silliness. That is not the way to fix your problem, at least not with just general combat situations.
I think the best way to address air to air versus air to ground combat would be to have two separate combat phases (only if both sides have aircraft in the battle). First, you have a special air to air combat phase. Since fighters are definitely the superior craft in strictly air to air combat, perhaps they should attack and defend @ 4, tac bombers perhaps 2 or 3 because they do have some dogfighting ability, just not the same as fighters. Strategic bombers would be low, perhaps attack @ 1 or 0, defend @ 1 or 2. This air to air combat phase would continue until one side or the other has NO planes left.

Then, when the air to air combat phase is complete, then you go to the main battle. In this case, I could see fighters only attacking and defending @ 3 while tac bombers would attack @ defend @ 4. In fact, I would say that even defending strategic bombers could defend @ 4 because they would be defending the territory by flying over the attacking ground forces and bombing them from above (remember, at this point there would be NO attacking aircraft to pester the bombers).
In a case where it is aircraft vs. ground units, attacking or defending fighters would be less effective against ground targets than tac bombers or strat bombers so I could see changing their values now.
Another thing I have considered is the possibility of catching enemy aircraft on the ground. In a lot of the early blitzkrieg battles, one reason the Germans were so successful was that the Luftwaffe managed to strike at many enemy airfields thus eliminating effective air defense from their victims. The US was pretty successful at this as well in several of the later battles of the Pacific war (Philippines, Okinawa, New Guinea).
So, I was wondering if there were some way to incorporate that aspect into this game. Like if you attack an enemy territory that has aircraft, and you are attacking with aircraft, roll a die and if you get a “1”, you catch your enemy off guard and destroy their planes on the ground. A roll of 2-6 would accomplish nothing.
Would this be a good idea? Or too overpowering?

Without talking directly on a topic about HR development, I could say that you describe many aspects which I consider about the game or the historical aspect. I bolded them.
When it covers some HR dimension, I just see it as an illustration of where it could have go, having much time to think about. And now, there is also the 1914 A&A mechanics which can give other kind of Larry Harris endorsement rules mechanisms.

For now, I’m mostly concerned about the way “we see offence and defence” for air units, and specifically TcB, at a strategical games which is not intended to be a total war simulation of WWII.

[barney]

This can be played on triplea now. It’s under Experimental entitled “Global 40 House Rules”. It also has the Canada Mod that simon33 created “Global 40 House Rules with Canada”. The Canada Mod currently doesn’t work with the new techs.

The only main change from the previous test versions is the “SubsCanEvadeDestroyers” Tech. Destroyers will now fire at Subs when subs pass by in combat move or ncm. They have a 1 in 10 chance at a hit. They also have another 1 in 10 chance at a hit in the Combat Phase. Explained in detail in the Game Notes.

Next will be to integrate Canada with all the new techs and adding all of the BM house rules.

[Black_Elk]

Thanks Barney! Sounds killer

I was MIA for a while there, bunch of RL issues came crashing in on me and I had to give up the ghost for a bit to get caught up. Had to pull one of those semi-annual Houdinis, but its nice to see people are still around. I haven’t had a whole lot of time to play G40 lately or to mess about in tripleA (though I did swoop a backup copy of AA50 last time I was at the game shop, just in case things open up for me one of these weekends.) Anyhow, will have to download the latest tripleA build and see what’s new on that front.

To the rest of the gang, hope all has been well. Will drop back by from time to time when I get a free minute to talk shop. Catch you next round

ps. looks pretty rad man! Just loaded up the experimental to mess about for sec. Nice work!

[Witt]

You have been missed . Thanks for coming back to explain.
Keep well.

[barney]

heh heh good to hear from ya Elk.  :-)
Gotta a fix for the " Sphere of Influence " that needs to be put in. Russia nuts up after a few rounds. Can still play by edit but I’ll go a head and update soon

[barney]

Got Canada dialed in with the rest of the countries. Hopefully anyway : ) but confidence is high. Got a test game going now.

Anyway, added a “Canada Boost” Tech for the Canada Mod. BC, Yukon and Labrador all get a Loonie. Haven’t played to see how much splitting Canada away from England control affects the game, but it seems that Britain/Canada will be weaker than having no Canada.

Currently Canada has “1” National Objective if “Sphere of Influence” Tech is activated. Unfortunately for Canada, it is a negative Objective. : )

So question is, what National Objectives should Canada have ? Some Objectives are offensive and some defensive. Would be nice to see one of each imo.
2 PUs for control of all of Canada ? Would be similar to some of the US ones. One land unit in Western Europe is another 2 ?

Anyway, probably take some game play to shake it all out. :)

On a side note, don’t see myself playing Global without Canada much in the future. The Map just looks too cool. simon33 did a Great Job !

[barney]

Gonna hold off on the NO but gonna add another tech. Alberta +2 inf and Ontario a Tac.
Prairie Boys ain’t sitting this one out : )

Should it be called “Mobilize Canada” or “Canadian Mobilization” ?

Personally I like them both. Also UK might need to get a couple dudes in London. Yea they do maybe idk : )

[CWO Marc]

@barney:

So question is, what National Objectives should Canada have ?

Perhaps something to do with national prestige, possibly tied to securing the Allied convoy routes in the Atlantic.  At the beginning of WWII, the Royal Canadian Navy was tiny and was considered by Britain to be more or less just an extension of the Royal Navy.  By the end of WWII, the RCN had grown enormously (mainly in terms of escort vessels) and was playing a major role in the Battle of the Atlantic.  So perhaps Canada could have the goal of controling certain sea zones in the Atlantic, and could gain national prestige (and maybe some extra cash) from doing so.

[barney]

Good Idea CWO I like it. When the “Convoy” tech is on it adds a pile of convoy and blockade zones. Those are important to control anyway but giving Canada a 2 PU boost for doing so sounds good.

[barney]

Here’s the Canada Boost. : ) Obviously you can always boost more or less with edit.

“Canada Boost” which gives BC a extra 1 PU and Yukon, New Foundland each get 1 PU as well.

“Canada Unit Boost” Gives 2 infantry to Alberta and a Tac Bomber to Ontario.

This is a Objective. “Get 2 PUs if the Allies control 123 and 117 Sea Zones”.

Haven’t played a lot with Canada. UK might need a couple extra dudes at start. Idk. They lose the Canada dough so …

Will upload to triplea soon.

Anyway just another option : )

[barney]

Updated to triplea. Canada is full go now. Will start adding the rest of the BM house rules

[barney]

hmm…:)

[General Veers]

This is on the subject of map modifications but I wonder if the designers intentionally gave the Kra Isthmus to Shan State to allow a connection to Malaya and cut off Siam to make a Japanese invasion a little more laborious? A land connection would allow an easy dumpoff of air units to Siam for a J2 attack without needing an amphibious assault. I’d be curious to see how this would play out in addition to a decent French presence (2 inf) in FIC to prevent the Japanese from walking in.

[barney]

yea Idk how to do map graphics. I’ll look into seeing if it can have some sorta icon show up to represent the connection. Not sure if one can trigger a TT connection or not though.

Actually triggering a canal might work. Not sure if you can do that either though.

Yea i bid a couple French guys one time. They got slayed but was one more thing Japan had to deal with.

[baron Münchhausen]

@barney:

Here’s the Canada Boost. : ) Obviously you can always boost more or less with edit.

“Canada Boost” which gives BC a extra 1 PU and Yukon, New Foundland each get 1 PU as well.

“Canada Unit Boost” Gives 2 infantry to Alberta and a Tac Bomber to Ontario.

This is a Objective. “Get 2 PUs if the Allies control 123 and 117 Sea Zones”.

Haven’t played a lot with Canada. UK might need a couple extra dudes at start. Idk. They lose the Canada dough so …

Will upload to triplea soon.

Anyway just another option : )

From historical POV, Ontario was more industrialized than Quebec and other TTs, it should deserve 1 PU. Also, I believe the main training ground for pilots was in AlSaMa rather Ontario, so I would place TcB in this TT instead (but this is a secondary issue). Maybe CWO might chimed in on these two…

[barney]

Right on. I’ll move the tac to the prairies. Think I’ll hold off on giving an extra buck to Toronto for now. Probably will be just fine to do though. Gave The Yukon a buck in case Japan takes AK. A minor bonus if the Allies are screwing up. Also they built the ALCAN and shuttled Lend Lease planes through there.

Gonna give UK two inf as well. Pretty sure there were some Canadians over there in 1940. I think that’s when Dieppe went down. I’m gonna start a play test in a couple hours for the next update. The split income probably makes UK pretty susceptible to sea lion.

Just have to playtest stuff out to find a semblance of balance. For now it’s just cool having Canada in there. The map looks sweet : ) Thanks again simon.

[baron Münchhausen]

We talked about Canada as minor power around these pages:
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36518.msg1646373#msg1646373

Around the time of Sea Lion, I read on web there was two fully equipped Canadian Infantry Divisions defending London against a German Invasion.