G40 League House Rule project

[arathorn]

I am suggesting that Gamerman01 creates a new thread for his rankings, so that it can start with a clean slate and have the link posted on the first page, so that we don’t have to remember which page it was last posted on.

Just a suggestion.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydEhlX0RfbGxmM3RMSHJQd083TV9JUGc#gid=0

[gamerman01]

This is what I’m doing with that suggestion:

I am having Guerilla Guy change the name of this thread because this thread is now about the House Ruled game project.

I am having him insert a line in the league rules under #3 that provides the link to the standings, so there will no longer be a “rankings thread” as it is not necessary since I’m not continually uploading new spreadsheets and discussion about the rankings (since they had a subjective component before) is no longer necessary.

[gamerman01]

Time to provide the link again for anyone joining us -
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydGh6d2NwRDJRRzBteEsyU1EtNGhXVUE#gid=4

Needing more ideas!
Favoring ones the reduce/eliminate cheese, reduce gross historical inaccuracies (like the flying Tigers and the Prince of Wales battleship that did not exist in 1940 that are at game setup), and keep things simple or make them simpler! (Like eliminating the complicated and needless Mongolia rules and eliminating France and ANZAC)

[gamerman01]

Without sacrificing awesome game play, of course.

Just trying to revamp G40 to eliminate ridiculous things and Larry rules that we hate, and make obviously needed improvements, mainly.  This is the spirit of the project.

Things like eliminating the cheesy 3 IPC per territory NO that Russia gets for taking Italian territories in Africa or the Mediterranean, the crazy strict neutral rules, Mongolia rules, some wacked out NO’s, etc.  Come join the fun

[Cow]

Make bombers roll 1d6 for disruption damage. No + anything.

Convoys do set damage again (hate rolling it out, too tedious).

Russia gets +5 as long as it owns vologda, urals, evenkiyskiy, yenisey, yakut, and buryatia… and is at war with Germany. (railroad)

Russia starts with +1 bomber.

America starts with +3 infantry.

Notice these are all allies buffs and axis nerfs.

[Cow]

Also that Japan island NO, needs to be changed, I never seen that NO active… ever… this is over hundreds of games.

Screw it +5 Japan for owning all the small islands it already owns and the phil.

That will be the one axis buff, a buff that encourages earlier DOW for Japan.

[Cow]

Also that would encourage the allies to actually take Iwo Jima like McArthur ordered.  Granted liberating small islands like Okinawa and Iwo Jima had limited strategic importance, but it is still debatable if it was a benefit.

[Cow]

An infantry for every island Japan starts with! rah rah rah.

[gamerman01]

Thanks for the ideas, Cow
If you look at my spreadsheet you would see that I agree with you on several and have already jotted them down.

Stupid Japan island NO made more attainable
+2 damage on SBR reduced to +1
Russia gets an additional NO (and I reduced the weird +3 one to take away Africa and islands)
Convoys do set damage again with no dice rolling

I will be considering your other ideas as well

I also took away a couple of Japan tacs.  Take a look at my spreadsheet (it has multiple tabs, for categories), you may find it interesting.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydGh6d2NwRDJRRzBteEsyU1EtNGhXVUE#gid=2

[Guest]

Removing France as a players makes the French navy obsolete. For example the destroyer at Z72 will sit there a lot of the time doing nothing.

[lexgreat]

What I never understood is why Japan would let unescorted TTs sail safely to their amphibious invasion sites, while a lone DD could get up to 6 kamikaze hits. I know that there is scrambling as well, but still.

At least sz 6 should get the kami option in combat move phase for TTs without surface ships.

[Guest]

@alexgreat:

What I never understood is why Japan would let unescorted TTs sail safely to their amphibious invasion sites, while a lone DD could get up to 6 kamikaze hits. I know that there is scrambling as well, but still.

At least sz 6 should get the kami option in combat move phase for TTs without surface ships.

How do you kamikaze on a submerged vessel?

[lexgreat]

Where did I say submerged? Last time I checked TTs stayed above water level ;)
And I said “without surface ships”. To clarify, a TT with only a sub as escort should also be target of kamikaze, imo.

[gamerman01]

@Soulblighter:

Removing France as a players makes the French navy obsolete. For example the destroyer at Z72 will sit there a lot of the time doing nothing.

French cruiser sitting in 110 and destroyer/cruiser sitting in 93 are still major issues for the Axis
I did think about the DD in Z72 but I see I never put anything in my spreadsheet.
I think we should make the one UK.  Remember, battleship in Z37 is being removed.

[gamerman01]

Thanks for bringing up unescorted transports, Alex

I am definitely opposed to kamikazes targeting transports, but I think there is another solution
I guess Larry’s solution was to disallow unescorted transports skating over enemy submarines.
I’m not sure if we want to do anything about this or not, but let’s think about it.

So you’re saying that (for example) an unescorted transport zooming in to land on Borneo (and presumably take it), from Queensland, is unrealistic and/or cheesy?  I guess under 2nd edition game rules, Japan has to leave a sub in Borneo’s zone if they want to require escort.  What do you think it should be?  Besides kamikazes.  A lot of these targets aren’t kamikaze zones anyway…

[lexgreat]

At least for sz6 I dont think unescorted transports planing to take Korea should be left unopposed by kamikazes, Japanese sub in place or not. You can make a case for the other kamikaze szs being not as protected as sz 6, but I’d prefer a rule that does not make excpetions. You are an Allies player, Gamerman :)

Borneo is not concerned as there is no kamikaze symbol.

I am not hysterical about this, I just think it impossible that Japan should let a TT with no escort sail past and take Korea when they would have a kami to stop them if they thought it important enough, strategically.

[gamerman01]

Well, a single fighter on Japan that can scramble prevents this, of course

[variance]

What if you made it so that unescorted transports can’t unload if there is a sub present OR if it is a kamikaze zone and Japan still has at least 1 kamikaze.  They can’t sink the transport with the kamikaze but a surface warship would be necessary for the transport to unload.

[Derek]

Could somebody update the OP with the house rule document?

Or possibly create a new thread?

Pretty confusing right now and a pain sifting through dozens of post trying to find the document.

[gamerman01]

Uncrustable, the problem is there is no edit access to this thread because it’s in the play boardgames section.
All you have to do is ask for it -
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydGh6d2NwRDJRRzBteEsyU1EtNGhXVUE#gid=2

I know it’s very different from what you’re doing, in most ways, but I would appreciate your general feedback