Begginings of vehicle and units rules inprogress

Here is an interesting bit of historical trivia. The US 8th Air Force actually had bases in the Ukraine for a short time. From June to September 1944, the 8th Air Force started a shuttle run of bombers that would take off from England and Italy, bomb targets in Germany then fly on to 3 bases in the Ukraine, Piryatin, Mirgorod and Poltava. The reasoning was mainly to show solidarity with the Russians and to hit Germany from an unexpected quarter.
The mission was called “Operation Frantic”. I don’t think it was much of a success. One reason is that the Luftwaffe bomber arm was still fairly strong in the East. Some Luftwaffe planes saw the American bombers heading into Russia. Then when a shot up P-51 crashed in Poland, it had documents on the Russian bases. Luftwaffe command was notified and they send Fliegerkorps IV, nearly 350 He 111s, to pound those bases while the B-17s were lined up in neat rows due to lack of space. It was the 8th Air Force’s costliest single operation of the war.
I didn’t even know about this until I read it in World War II magazine.

There are a lot of good ideas here that’s for sure. Some, like IL’s ideas are great theme based ideas that real capture the essence of the China theater and others, like Gar’s are great from a game play mechanic point of view. I think any of them would be an improvement to the existing state of affairs for China’s movement restrictions.

@Yavid:

why not let china place there inf. in any original chinese territory even if they don’t control them. if it’s unoccupied then they gain control, if it is occupied then combat insues as soon as the territory is attacked by an allied power or on Japan’s combat phase which ever one comes first.

I like this idea, but it would need to be controlled. Making it so that the Chinese could mobilize new units (maybe 1 or 2 infantry) in any original Chinese territory that is unoccupied might make this better, and again, a great way to represent the guerrilla and partisan warfare that was a major part of the fighting in China during WW2.

@Young:

Chinese units may move into any friendly, hostile, or neutral territory during the combat or non-combat movement phases. However, they may never enter Russian territories for any reason.

I see the thinking here, but I think its entirely to arbitrary, Japan should not have a way to “opt out” of Fighting China. I think having something in place that would want Japan to keep some portion of China under occupation (I would have thought the victory city would have been reason enough but I guess i’m just old fashioned  :| ). Placing a penalty on Japan for doing so by removing China’s movement restrictions is a good idea and giving China the ability to become more of a threat is even better.

Perhaps making it so that once China captures all of its original territories it’s movement restrictions are lifted. This was Japan will want to keep at least one Chinese territories under its control to keep them in check. However, lets up the ante here, if Japan is pushed off the Asian mainland (for sake of argument lets keep it to all non Soviet land territories) China can place an IC in Shanghai which will be their capital for the remainder of the game and can purchase units normally. This way even if China is able to move and attack where ever she wants, Japan still has a chance to push them back before China gains the ability to deliver the knock out blow to Japan.

and just to note, I would have to believe that by the time either of these instances were to happen, the game would be all but over for Japan anyway.

I agree with King of Aces on the Heavy Tank stats: 4-4-1-8. Not sure about the 2-hit idea, but it sounds interesting. I suppose you could simply put a damage marker under it like you do with Capital ships that take the first damage hit but survive the battle.
Also interested in IL’s idea that Heavy Tanks can move 2 in NCM only.
Light tanks should be 2-2-2-5. Giving them 3 on defense is too much.

I slightly redesigned my concept of ATGs:

ATGs should be 1(2)/2(3)/1 units.

1/2/1 vs all units except tanks
2/3/1 vs tanks

It’s more logical to get the + 1 bonus against tanks as an ATG in both, attack and defense.

This makes ATGs more valuable and justifies its costs of 4 IPC.

@orion-21:

I think air is the key to winning the war.

I’m thinking any rule(s) that makes it that decisive needs serious revision. Douhet was wrong.

How about these varient pieces such as,

Blockhouses (I use the mall units from Tri-opoly)
Improves infantry defense to 3 on a matching 1/1 basis. Must have at least 1 infantry in territory to construct. Units hit by a blockhouse during an amphibious assault cannot counter-attack on the first round.
During an offshore bombardment from a battleship, hits are assigned to blockhouses first.
Finland/Norway, Germany, and Western Europe each start with one.
Atk: 0
Def: 3
Move: 0
Cost: 5

Half Tracks (includes armored cars)
Can blitz as a tank.
Considered a tank when transporting.
Carries 1 infantry OR 1 artillery, 2 spaces.
Starting placement: On every territory that contains 1 infantry and 1 tank.
Atk: 2
Def: 2
Move: 2
Cost: 5

LHP / LHA / LHD
Carries 1 fighter and 2 infantry units, no artillery or tanks (If you use chopper units they carry that instead of fighters)
Atk: 1
Def: 3
Move: 2
Cost: 16 (same as carrier)

Thanks, I suppose I really should have looked on the box.

Hey, I have been playing this game since it was invented. I have seen tons of different strategies, and tried lots of different things. My friends are also very experienced players. I never said building an IC early with japan wasn’t risky, but for me the rewards outweigh the risks. besides, when you are the axis, you’re at a disadvantage to start. If you want to play a game that takes forever to play and you will most assuredly lose then that is your choice. I prefer to take the bull by the horns, go balls out and see if evil can prevail! Trust me you do not want to play me. I’m your worst nightmare, because I’m crazy and smart.