Balancing Cruiser (CL) and Battleship (BB) units with other A&A units

All fair points. I look forward to your upcoming house rule releases!

Sounds good. I think I’ll go with that.
Thank you all for the input.  :-)

@Dauvio:

@Baron:

@SS:

Ya I like it too.
2 inf = A2 A25.0% total
1 inf+1 art = A4 A50% total makes up the drop for sure.
Cost ya 7 instead 6 icps.

Do you know how many Art are bought in a game on average for China ?

I hope it will be at least Arty A3 D2, so chinese Inf will get A2+A3 for 5/8 or 62.5% which is nearer the OOB 4/6 (66.7%) combined arms.

This little case also shows that China might be better with a strong Arty A3 D3 because defense 5/8 (62.5%) will be nearer OOB 66.7% for Art+Inf.
Otherwise, 50% 4/8 combined defense is a whole D6 pip below OOB 66.7%

China need something because japanese Fighter and TcB keeps their usual OOB 50% attack per unit.

Interesting idea about Chinese Inf at cost 2.
Mostly the case with AA50.

Baron Munchhausen have been using the ENIGMA (vann) FORMULAS on these proposals???

Hi Vann,
I made up a straighter version of Enigma formula based on the odds of making a hit instead of using the number on dice.

So, you can change the values but still can compare if you immediately use the odds as input to the formula.
It allows to compare within any dice system and a same unit with different cost or odds.

Here is below the post with YG roster and variants still discussed:

@Baron:

YG’s complete D8s roster

Here is the comparative with Enigma formula (still using a 12 IPCs unit reference) based on odds, not dice number.
144*Odds/cost^2 = strength of unit on same odds by hit per IPCs basis.

I bolded the greatest number between D8 or D6 for same unit.
When there is no difference, I did nothing.
So, you can see at glance which is boosted or nerfed compared to OOB.

Unit type  Combat value  (D8 system) (D6 OOB)
Infantry       A1-2 D2    (2.00-** / 4.00)         (2.67-3.92 / 5.33)
Inf A2+Arty A2 D2         2.94**  /  2.94         (3.92 / 3.92)
Inf A2+Arty A3 D2         3.67**  /  2.94         Same as above
Inf A2+Arty A3 D3         3.67**  /  3.67         Same as above

MechInfantry A1-2 D2  (1.125-** / 2.25)       (1.50-3.00 / 3.00)
MechInf A2+Art A2 D2  (2.25** / 2.25) vs       (3.00 / 3.00)
MechInf A2+Art A3 D2  (2.81** / 2.25) vs        Same as above
MechInf A2+Art A3 D3  (2.81** / 2.81) vs        Same as above

Artillery   A2 D2       (2.25 / 2.25)                  (3.00 / 3.00)
Artillery    A3 D2       (3.375 / 2.25)               Same as above
Artillery    A3 D3       (3.375 / 3.375)             Same as above

Tank         A4 D4            (2.00 / 2.00)            (2.00 / 2.00)

Anti-Air A  A0 D1* (0.00 / 0.72 per plane)       (0.00 / 0.96 per plane)

Fighter      A4 D5    (0.72 / 0.90 )              (0.72 / 0.96)

TcBomber  A4-5 D4 (0.595-** / 0.595)       (0.595 / 0.595)

TcB A5+Tank C17    (1.12** / 1.00)         (1.16 / 1.00)
TcB A5+Fighter C21 (0.735** / 0.653)     (0.761 / 0.653)
StBomber  A5 D1    (0.625 / 0.125)         (0.667 / 0.167)

Submarine  A2 D1 (1.00, fs: 1.50 / 0.50 fs: 0.67)   (1.33, fs: 2.00 / 0.67 fs: 0.89)
Submarine  A3 D2 (1.50, fs: 2.25 / 1.00 fs: 1.33)   (1.33, fs: 2.00 / 0.67 fs: 0.89)
Destroyer    A2 D2 (0.563 / 0.563)                        (0.75 / 0.75)
Destroyer    A3 D3 (0.844 / 0.844)                        (0.75 / 0.75)
Cruiser        A5 D5  (0.625 / 0.625)                       (0.50 / 0.50)
Carrier, 2 hits A0 D2 (0.0 / 0.368)                            (0.00 / 0.491)
Carrier, 2 hits A0 D3 (0.0 / 0.552)                          As above
Battleship    A6 D6   (0.707 / 0.707)                      (0.628 / 0.628)

Well, as long as you admit to it being different and for those reasons, I see no issues. I am interested to see what exactly you come up with.

These posts from a past thread on AA guns summarized many AAA’s limitations:

@Vance:

I guess the issue is that AA guns are of equal value to fighters, as Fortress said, but only in terms of defense.

Fighters are expensive units, but are often a good buy because they provide defense, offense, and mobility.

AA guns are all defense, only move 1 space in NCM and have no offense at all.

So while its true that a $5 AA gun has a 50/50 shot at taking out a $10 plane (and yes sometimes they get 2 or even 3 planes, including more expensive tacs or bombers), overall you don’t see people building AA guns very often, if ever. A house rule for AA guns getting something extra like antitank capability would add some extra historical flavour to the game.

@allweneedislove:

like ryguy, i also would like to know why aaguns were changed but still suck.
aaguns were a boring unit that no one purchased. 2nd edition did a good job changing them to behave like a regular unit that can have more than one in the same territory and be taken as casualties. however, they are still boring and a bad purchase.
@Fortress:

Why are we trying to fix something that’s not broken? I laid out the math very specifically. Nobody has refuted it. It literally couldn’t be fairer. They are worth exactly what they should be worth. Where’s the case that there is a problem?…

aaguns are broken and should have been fixed with the 2nd edition revision. they are overpriced.

@Fortress:

….That is absolutely perfect. You can’t improve on that. Literally.

i think you are being disingenuous. you are a better player than what your posts in this thread would have readers believe. you do not purchase aaguns yourself as they are the least flexible and cost efficient unit.

your math works with the framework of a single battle with fighters attacking aaguns. thankfully the game is more than just this one type of battle.
like vance states, they are the unit with the least offense, they are the unit with the least mobility, they only fire if planes are attacking them, they are only used in land battles, they are the 2nd most expensive land unit.

@ryguy:

Part of the problem might be that they are so damn immobile when traveling overseas. Why can’t AA guns move during the combat phase? Would it mess the game up completely? If you capture a territory overland, you can always move the AA gun into that territory during the non-combat phase on the same turn so you are accomplishing the same thing. You cant do that via transports however if the transport was involved during the combat phase. Why cant you just unload the damn AA guns with the attacking force? Why not treat AA guns like tanks/mech infantry/artillery in respect to transports? Why not let the AA guns travel with the attacking force overland during the combat phase?

If were talking in real life terms this might seem weird (Im not a buff on military equipment used in WWII) but it makes them more versatile. You can make it a rule that AA guns cant be chosen as casualties when attacking if you wish, but they definitely cannot shoot at planes when attacking. Theyre just along for the ride. This makes it much easier to transport them overseas without having to purchase separate transports for the non-combat phase. I like mixed arms and this might incorporate AA guns into the mix more often for the Allies.

Im not sure if I like the idea of one IPC AA guns with one shot. I would rather see the current AA gun scheme with a value of 3-4 IPCs with the above rule changes about movement perhaps. If theyre valued under infantry they will get used as fodder more than their original purpose and I dont like that. I still find it strange that AA guns can be chosen as casualties first. Was that rule created just because of the UK and Sea Lion?

@WILD:

Yeah I don’t like how AAA guns are just ignored after the first round of battle, and normally are the first casualty (seems like a flaw). Not sure that they should be able to fire one shot each round afterwords though unless you made it that they only fire 2 shots in the opening round, and one shot each round after that. I also agree that attacking planes should have the option to attack AAA guns directly (maybe AAA is taken as a casualty if air units roll a 1?), and/or can retreat after any round if AAA are allowed to continue firing.

WILD BILL provided two interesting abilities to planes which can limit somehow the unbalancing effect of AAA#1 or AAA#2 continuous firing :

1- Any hit from attacking planes could be directly taken on AAA units.
2- All attacking aircraft units can retreat after each combat round while ground units still be part of the battle.

Maybe one or both should be add to the mix to reach an equilibrium point.

Hello all,
I just decided to make this account to ask these questions:

I get together with my dad, my cousins, my uncle and myself every year on vacation, and we play A&A Spring 1942. Honestly, myself and my uncle are better players than my cousins and my dad. I was thinking that it might be fun if we can get a “challenge” setup. Does anyone have any different setups that might give a large advantage to the allies? It would be more fun for myself and my uncle to team up, because we always play on opposite sides.

Also, does anyone have any extra rules we can add to limit the time games take? We added a timer, and a max time limit of 2 hours to our last game, and it worked out very well.

Also, these have to be for the Spring 1942 version. (Not sure what edition, think its second.)

Thank you for any help ;)

I think the plane that is in the FMG set as the transport plane could double for a light/medium bomber.

Yeah, those other Soviet planes would be cool to get.  Unfortunately, FMG’s USSR set is a while away yet – USA is next up and Britain/ANZAC are after them.  I’m pretty sure HBG won’t come out with Russians until after we find out just what is going to be in the FMG USSR set.

Hey, I just wasn’t sure what he ment thats all. :)