The key is the concentration of Russian income in the western tts most likely to be captured by Germany.
So:
increase the overall Soviet income to something more like historical levels, but with the bulk of its industrial base (income) in the west (i.e. Ukraine, Belarus, Leningrad, Caucasus)
give the USSR a factory in the Urals, or allow them to transport one factory from the western tts during the game
This means that
Germany can still grab a big slice of Russian income with successful early attacks
Russia will still have a large area to draw income from even if the industrial west is lost
To balance, the number of tts in Russia might need to be increased, with tts roughly the same size as those in West/Central Europe. This gives Russia time to build up a large army, but not if it allows Germany to drive too far east.
This is of course also dependent on my own insistence upon:
1. No building units in captured factories
2. Unlimited (rail) non combat movement within controlled tts
3. Limited infantry placement in non factory tts
Flash, I think we are trying to work within the boundaries of the board we have.
So adding Russian territories is a little unworkable.
More IPCs via National Objectives, or a Mechanic that gives free units to the Soviets some how is what is needed (provided they meet the conditions) to give the USSR a fighting chance against Germany.
Also thanks Toblerone77
What the Soviets got from lend lease, in vast amounts was aircraft, and trucks.
So if we want to give the Soviets lend lease material it shouldn’t be tanks. Which are aggressive units.
Where they get them is also important.
Most trucks were brought over via the arctic route to archangel and Leningrad.
Most planes were sent across the Bering Strait.
And raw materials were sent to the Persian gulf
This was at the expense of the US and UK, so if we want to eliminate transports and really simplify this, we could do something like this and have it something like research.
Lend Lease optional rule
During the US research and development phase the US may purchase lend lease tokens for 5 IPCs. (place Soviet control markers on Eastern United States)
The United States may purchase one lend lease token for each of the following territories controlled by allied forces: Amur, Archangel, Persia.
During the Soviet place units phase they may attempt to cash these in by rolling on the following chart:
1. Supplies destroyed by Axis forces (token is removed)
2. Supplies delayed (token remains)
3. Supplies delayed (token remains)
4. Collect 5 IPCs if Persia is controlled by the Allies
5. Place two mechanized infantry in Archangel
6. Place a fighter in Amur
Flash, I think we are trying to work within the boundaries of the board we have.
So adding Russian territories is a little unworkable.More IPCs via National Objectives, or a Mechanic that gives free units to the Soviets some how is what is needed (provided they meet the conditions) to give the USSR a fighting chance against Germany.
Also thanks Toblerone77
What the Soviets got from lend lease, in vast amounts was aircraft, and trucks.
So if we want to give the Soviets lend lease material it shouldn’t be tanks. Which are aggressive units.Where they get them is also important.
Most trucks were brought over via the arctic route to archangel and Leningrad.
Most planes were sent across the Bering Strait.
And raw materials were sent to the Persian gulfThis was at the expense of the US and UK, so if we want to eliminate transports and really simplify this, we could do something like this and have it something like research.
Lend Lease optional rule
During the US research and development phase the US may purchase lend lease tokens for 5 IPCs. (place Soviet control markers on Eastern United States)
The United States may purchase one lend lease token for each of the following territories controlled by allied forces: Amur, Archangel, Persia.
During the Soviet place units phase they may attempt to cash these in by rolling on the following chart:1. Supplies destroyed by Axis forces (token is removed)
2. Supplies delayed (token remains)
3. Supplies delayed (token remains)
4. Collect 5 IPCs if Persia is controlled by the Allies
5. Place two mechanized infantry in Archangel
6. Place a fighter in Amur
I like this idea quite a bit. Especially in the Research and Development phase. I liked the idea of trying to ship or fly a unit over too but I think your idea is less complicated.
Flash, I think we are trying to work within the boundaries of the board we have.
So adding Russian territories is a little unworkable.More IPCs via National Objectives, or a Mechanic that gives free units to the Soviets some how is what is needed (provided they meet the conditions) to give the USSR a fighting chance against Germany.
Also thanks Toblerone77
What the Soviets got from lend lease, in vast amounts was aircraft, and trucks.
So if we want to give the Soviets lend lease material it shouldn’t be tanks. Which are aggressive units.Where they get them is also important.
Most trucks were brought over via the arctic route to archangel and Leningrad.
Most planes were sent across the Bering Strait.
And raw materials were sent to the Persian gulfThis was at the expense of the US and UK, so if we want to eliminate transports and really simplify this, we could do something like this and have it something like research.
Lend Lease optional rule
During the US research and development phase the US may purchase lend lease tokens for 5 IPCs. (place Soviet control markers on Eastern United States)
The United States may purchase one lend lease token for each of the following territories controlled by allied forces: Amur, Archangel, Persia.
During the Soviet place units phase they may attempt to cash these in by rolling on the following chart:1. Supplies destroyed by Axis forces (token is removed)
2. Supplies delayed (token remains)
3. Supplies delayed (token remains)
4. Collect 5 IPCs if Persia is controlled by the Allies
5. Place two mechanized infantry in Archangel
6. Place a fighter in Amur
VERY nice idea. Could you make #6 a tactical bomber instead of a fighter? That way its more of an offensive unit rather than a defensive one. Tacs defend @3 and hit @4 when paired with a tank or fighter (ie motivation for Russia to build tanks), and more importantly it cannot intercept SBR. It should not be a strategic bomber because the range would get it to the front too fast. These planes might find get diverted into China sometimes.
If Archangel/Amur/Persia is axis controlled and Russia rolls 4/5/6, would that become “supplies delayed”, or would the lose it?
Yea, I guess it would be “supplies delayed” and at that point, the US can’t buy anymore tokens.
It would be fine if it was a tactical bomber instead. The soviets did get a lot of those from us.
Yea, I guess it would be “supplies delayed” and at that point, the US can’t buy anymore tokens.
It would be fine if it was a tactical bomber instead. The soviets did get a lot of those from us.
Here is a different way of distribution with 2D6 rolls & add together:
2 to 4. Supplies destroyed by Axis forces (token is removed) (2/12 odds)
5-6. Supplies delayed (token remains) (3/12 odds)
7. Collect 5 IPCs if Persia is controlled by the Allies (2/12 odds)
8-9. Place two mechanized infantry in Archangel (3/12 odds)
10. Place a fighter in Amur (1/12 odds)
11-12.Place a tactical bomber in Amur (1/12 odds)
So 5/12 odds of a bad roll for Allies.
5/12 odds to get units
2/12 odds to get IPCs.
You still have room left for some Artillery or AAA if you want.
You can reduce the odds for TcB (ex.: “12” only) and increase it for Fg (ex.:“10-11”) if you wish.
Or reverse the numbers: “10-11” gives a TcB and “12” gives a Fg, as you see fit history.
Yea but that really ups the number of dice being rolled.
Because if its all just a 6 item chart, you can roll all the dice together and consult the chart.
For a 2d6 system, you are rolling different sets, and comparing different numbers.
Though 2d6 offers more variation, 1d6 keeps it simple and smooth.
If what the results are needs to be changed then so be it, but the number of rolls should be kept very low so this is a streamlined house rule.
Maybe instead, it requires 3 charts according to the way lend-lease reach Russia:
1. Supplies destroyed by Axis forces (token is removed)
2. Supplies delayed (token remains)
3. Supplies delayed (token remains)
4. Collect 4 IPCs if Persia is controlled by the Allies
5. Collect 8 IPCs if Persia is controlled by the Allies
6. Collect 12 IPCs if Persia is controlled by the Allies
1. Supplies destroyed by Axis forces (token is removed)
2. Supplies delayed (token remains)
3. Supplies delayed (token remains)
4. Place 1 mechanized infantry in Archangel
5. Place 2 mechanized infantry in Archangel
6. Place 3 mechanized infantry in Archangel
1. Supplies destroyed by Axis forces (token is removed)
2. Supplies destroyed by Axis forces (token is removed)
3. Supplies delayed (token remains)
4. Place a fighter in Amur
5. Place a tactical bomber in Amur
6. Place a strategical bomber in Amur
With the 3 charts, do you then pick one of the 3 charts before you roll your dice then? What if you throw a 3 side die, number gives you your chart and then roll a 6 die. Just 1 extra throw anyway.
@SS:
With the 3 charts, do you then pick one of the 3 charts before you roll your dice then? What if you throw a 3 side die, number gives you your chart and then roll a 6 die. Just 1 extra throw anyway.
Both can work.
I haven’t think about it.
For each 5 IPCs token from USA, Russia roll 1D6 for as long as the territory is owned by him:
1-2 chart of Persia,
3-4 chart of Archangel, or
5-6 chart of Amur.
If any one is lost, then roll only 1D2 for the 2 last territories: 1-3/4-6
When there is only one territory owned, then pick the corresponding chart.
I keep a few different types of dice around for HR’s. You can get a D20 die for less than a dollar at a hobby shop. It’s perfect for home brew research tables.
I think for oztea’s purpose his D6 chart is pretty good. @Baron I think you’d really have some fun with RPG style dice. I myself have been looking into using some D12s for different stuff.
I understand the idea but a good russian player don’t need those bonus and free piece to win.
These are some very interesting and creative ideas. How do they work out in the grande picture of the game I wonder? I’ll see how they work in my games, if it’s cool with everyone else in my group.
In the original post it was suggested that infantry be used to represent the population and give a boost to Russia. Has anyone tried to think of how a partisan system like in the Global War 1939 version would fit in G40? It’s very similar to how the extra infantry would work in the original post, but with different mechanics (which I can explain later on if need be). The only reason I suggest this is because some other people might find that the IPC’s that Russia can generate already represent the lend/lease agreement that was proposed earlier in the thread. It might be argued that the partisan rule can then be applied to any enemy occupied territory, but that’s beside the point haha.
I like the idea of a lend lease system to russia, and ozteas is the best.
One prereq should be no allied units in any original soviet territories, i also think that the dice should favor the Russians a tad more than Ozteas current system.
And i present a slight adjustment.
The lend lease token should cost 8. And either UK Europe or USA can purchase them.
Russia can decide for which territory it wishes to receive the bonus. Amur is fighter, Cauc is cash(8), Archangel is 2 mech.
D6 rolls:
1=token destroyed
2=token delayed
3-6=lend lease succesfull
WOAH :-o
I like the idea that the Soviets get to pick where they cash their lend lease in.
But it cant be 8 IPCs per token, otherwise they will never pick Archangel if it’s only 2 mech.
I would say keep the tokens at 5 IPCs, and make the chart
1 - Token Destroyed
2-3 - Token Delayed
4-6 - Lend Lease Successful
Then the Soviets can pick any of the following:
A fighter in Amur
Two Infantry and a Mech Infantry in Archangel
+10 IPCs if the allies control a series of connected territories from Persia to Russia
Your chart has little logic in my opinion. USA 5 IPCs suddenly becomes 10 IPCs?
I understand that with an above 1/3 chance of losing it altogether it encourages without (hopefully) becoming abused. But with IPCs doubling at the roll of a dice this could definitely become overpowering.
I prefer IPCs to match up i guess (call it OCD),
The adjustments i offer, to me, are more logical; and make up for medium-risk high-reward (your chart) with low risk even reward…
What do you think of the notion of no allied units in original Russian territories as a prereq for the lend-lease tokens? This would be historically accurate, yes ?
I also prefer Caucasus over Persia as per ‘original Russian territories’
Let’s try and remember this is a House Rule and exchange of ideas not a call for league, tourney, or official OOB rule changes. It’s a “buffet” if we don’t want beets or baby corn in our salad we don’t have to eat them.
Agreed.
And well obviously, the rule would also go hand in hand with “no allied units in soviet territory”
