‘88s’ – ANTI-TANK GUNS

There’s no official answer that I know of.  A&A is such an abstracted game that, in one sense, it would be meaningless to say that game unit X corresponds to real-world military (or naval) formation Y.  Given the scope of A&A Global 1940, however, the various unit types on the map would roughly correspond to large formations if we were to assume that the allocation of units in the rules corresponds to real WWII numbers.  As an example, Germany’s invasion of the USSR was carried out with over 150 divisions – so from that perspective, the small number of sculpts on the actual board could at best only correspond to army groups.  At that level, it shouldn’t even be possible to differentiate between the components of the army groups, nor even of their consitutent armies or corps; the highest-level tank formations in WWII were, I think, armoured divisions and (one level further down) tank brigades.  So one way to look at the game would be to imagine that we’re not actually seeing the military formations themselves, but rather a patchwork picture showing some of the elements of those formations, with some of these elements being high-level ones and others being lower-level ones (like tank brigades).

Good point. I originally did this to balance the fact that Germany gets an AA gun for every coastal territor making it tough for the Brits to invade. Only way to balance was to make it tough for Germany to invade. Also keep in mind that this is a part of a setup that adds tons more units. For instance:
North Africa: Germany: 3 infantry, 1 mech, 1 artillery, 1 tank Italy: 2 infantry 1 mech, 1 artillery, 1tank.
Egypt: UK 2 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 mech, 1 AAA, 2 tanks, 1 T bomber ANZAC: 1 infantry,  1 artillery France: 1 infantry.
Allies get more in Middle East and Africa and Axis have three transports in Mediterranean. I really should post the whole setup.

Oh look, a WWI tanks thread where people show up and start posting about WWII tank houserules.

Imperious Leaders draconian house rule policy has ruined WWI house ruling.

@CWO:

Just to toss an extra factor into this discussion, one should remember that (in real life) deploying a defensive minefield around a port isn’t consequence-free for the defender.  Such minefields help protect the port from penetration by enemy ships, but they also impair the port’s capacity to handle friendly ships because they have to waste time picking their way through the minefields, something which requires good minefield charts, slow speeds and careful navigation by the harbour pilots.

You are completely right about this, but as it is ports have no restrictions on use. A naval base could service 100 carriers as easily as a single submarine. Unless youre suggesting that friendly ships should roll for mines, I am not sure that this is practical. Perhaps the conversion of a peacetime harbor to a mine-infested, artillery-ridden military base should come with a restiction on the number of ships that can use its facilities a turn. Maybe 8? That begs the inclusion of a smaller piece (port? harbor?) that has the same capabilities of the naval base, but on a smaller scale, and with less cost.

@Baron:

I found this interesting questions:
It happens that I forget this situation in this alternate Sub Warfare.
I would try to provide a specific rules when I will find if it falls in the sub alone category (historical POV: subs are not protecting scrambling planes) or the subs+warships (game mechanics POV: there is another different friendly unit in the SZ) category:

@ShadowHAwk:

What would happen in this situation.

Transports dont move but load and then unload from the same SZ.
A hostile submarine is available in the SZ as well as a friendly destroyer and some planes. ( so you can load )
Now defender scrambles 1 fighter and hits the destroyer.
Attacker kills the fighter but fails to destroy the sub.

As we are in combat and the planes cant hit the sub and the sub cant hit the planes it is a stalemate there.
You cannot unload because there is still sea combat going on.
You cannot retreat because to retreat you have to move to a zone that your naval was comming from which is this SZ.

Will the transports be defenseless ?? They cant run and the sub cant die.

Since it is clear that the defender have the choice to scramble planes or not, this situation will be put in the Subs with warships. I added the correction in the initial post.
I rationalize it this way: subs are mobilized to stop invasion and the amphib. assault so, instead fleeing any contact with ennemy’s ship, they are seeking them instead. Hence, no need to go on Air Search Patrol to find defending subs.

So, ennemy’s planes can destroy subs even if there is no DD on their side. See the opening post.

I like that idea IL about assigning historical significance.

I was going to give you a “+1” for the above comment, but I see it will be swallowed up by your LARGE negative rating and will go unnoticed.  I could bounce around and give you a lot of positive marks - because I am assuming that is what someone else has done.

http://www.skytrex.com I think I will get here saw this link on a thread here ht eother day seems pratty good and it has pretty much every vehicle in WW2.

Also in regards to the arty that speciall attack would be like this.

At the begining of combat if there are 2 or more SPA’s in combat they fire each one shot and hit on a roll of 1, units hit by this cannot fire back.

But maybe this rule is to overpowered it seemed cool on paper but I dunno hehe, just seems to much and I wanted to keep the SPA cost low.

Also I Thought up of a speciall ability for the SPG. Since it is an anti tank wep as long as it is defending you can call a specific target wich must be an armored vehicle.

Edit: Also I was thinking of adding Heay tanks only for Germany and USSR since they where the only ones who reallky used them in the war.

I would love this rule because it would also allow me to use my AA guns more effectively in my AA gun/ artillery house rule.