Delta Deck: cards for playing G40 Delta house rules

@Grinchveld
So you want to add a pdf-file to a forum post? No problem.
See the symbols above the text-box you are writing in.

Hit the symbol marked in this screenshot:

018fc49b-5dc4-4d65-a61f-ada2247d42f6-image.png

Select your file - and send your posting.

Hey guys/girls,

First time posting on the forums, thus first time submitting my house rules, so bear with me. I created a stylized rule sheet, but as far as I understand I’m not allowed to post a hyperlink yet, so I will have to type them out here. I apologize for the lack of aesthetic.  :-P

It is important to remember that I have no idea if these rules are balanced or not. I have only had a couple of chances to test it out. That’s why I would love some feedback; any observations, improvements, and criticisms are encouraged and welcomed. Don’t hold back, folks.

HBG provides beautiful blue acrylic naval mine tokens that I use when implementing these rules. In essence, my naval mines act as ocean AAAs and the similarities can be easily discerned. This also helps in understanding their affect.

Naval Mines
Cost: 6 IPCs
Attack: N/A
Defense: 1
Movement: N/A

Unit Characteristics

Blocks Enemy Movement: Sea zones containing naval mines block the movement of enemy sea units. However, cruisers may bypass naval mines, as well as disarm them.

Sea Defence: A naval mine unit can defend only when enemy units enter the sea zone containing the naval mine. Naval mines defend only once, before the first round of combat. Naval mines may defend up to three times, but only once per attacking sea unit. For each “1” rolled, the attacker chooses one sea unit as a casualty. These casualties are removed immediately, and will not participate in the remainder of the battle.

Amphibious Assault Defence: In the event of an amphibious assault on a coastal territory with naval mines in the adjacent sea zone, transports must be chosen as casualties first. A die is rolled by the defender for each transport engaging in the amphibious assault, up to three times. For each “1” rolled, the attack chooses one transport as a casualty.

Limited Placement: Naval mines can only be placed in sea zones adjacent to coastal territories.

Cannot Hit Air Units: When defending, naval mines cannot hit air units.

When a coastal territory is captured by enemy land units, any naval mines in adjacent sea zones are destroyed.

The transports taken as casualties first may seem, “iffy” (for lack of a better term) but it is meant to emulate the real danger posed by naval mines. I am worried this might be imbalanced/overpowered, but I think it adds a whole new dimension to Amphibious Assaults.  
In addition to the Naval Mines, I sought to expand the role of cruisers. I think the general opinion is that Cruisers aren’t worth their cost (though I could be mistaken.) With this in mind, I decided to provide a specific foil for the Naval Mines, but merging the role of a Minesweeper/hunter with that of the Cruiser.

Cruiser/Minesweeper
Cost: 12 IPCs
Attack: 3
Defense: 3
Movement: 2

Unit Characteristics

Minesweeper: Cruisers are specially equipped for mine sweeping duties. When entering a sea zone containing naval mines, cruisers cancel the Sea Defence and Amphibious Assault Defense characteristics of the naval mine.

Minehunter: Cruisers can also attempt to disarm naval mines. After combat (if any) is resolved, cruisers can attempt to disarm any naval mines present. If a “4” or less is rolled, the naval mines are disarmed and removed from play. If a “5” or more was rolled, the naval mines were not disarmed, and the cruiser must wait until the next round to attempt to disarm them again.

Treat hostile Naval Mines as Friendly: Cruisers can move through a sea zone containing enemy mines. Their movement is not blocked by the Naval mines.

Any and all comments are appreciated. If you notice anything even just by reading these, share it. I’m also open for rule clarifications, in case there’s any confusion.

Thanks guys/girls.

Hmmm, How do I alter the topic title? It says 1942 as the year - that was a mistake - the darn thing took so long to type.

@Imperious:

OK.
Cruisers when they shoot and roll a 1 can force the defender to remove a plane
Cruisers move 3 spaces even if they didn’t come out of port.
Now they are worth the extra 2 IPC.

@Young:

@variance:

Another idea has been that each cruiser would only fire an AA shot at 1 attacking plane.

This is better than 3 shots per ship IMO.

So our Cruisers combine those ideas and get:
1-An attack and a defense @3 + 1 bombard @3,
2-A first round AA @1 against 1 attacking aircraft,
3-Cruisers when they shoot, either on attack or defense, and roll a 1 can force the attacker/defender to remove a plane.

In the game I played, the AA has more of a psychological impact than a real effect.
Indeed, it never destroyed any aircraft. And thus, neither by the AA and even by the “1” roll which force the defender to destroy an aircraft.

But UK bought 3 cruisers, instead of any BB, against German Luftwaffe.

Thanks everybody, those suggestions makes cruiser a more interesting unit that worth buying.

However, it can be a real nuisance for Germany but it may also help protect the Baltic fleet against UK aircrafts: at least, it slightly upgrade the Baltic fleet to better defend against attacking UK planes.

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=9531

Due to the nature of the game, that more often than not results in Germany and Japan playing two different games, I had an idea for an house rule to speed up a live game.

This idea requires quite few changes to the mechanics of the game, and requires at least 4 live players.

The turn order is:

Germany AND Japan
Russia
United States European Command AND United States Pacific Command
UK London AND Uk Pacific
Italy
France AND Australia

So basically, while Germany do G1, the Japanese players sets up J1 too.
USA is split in two nations, in the same manner that UK is, with two different economies.
The two USA commands are played by two different players, as the two UK economies are played by two different players.

So for example, let’s say we’re playing a game between LARRY, KRIEG, NOLL, OZTEA and KAUF.

LARRY plays GERMANY and ITALY.
KRIEG plays SOVIET RUSSIA
NOLL plays JAPAN
OZTEA plays USA EUROPEAN COMMAND, UK LONDON, FRANCE
KAUF plays USA PACIFIC COMMAND, CHINA, UK PACIFIC, ANZAC

During turn1 Larry sets up G1, meanwhile Noll sets up J1.
When both players are done, Krieg plays R1.
After Krieg is done with R1, Oztea and Kauf plays an independant game, they both go from USA to UK turn independently. Kauf plays also ANZAC.
At this point Larry plays Italy.
Then Oztea plays France and a new turn starts.

In order to make this work, these house rules have to be implemented:

USA economies is split, but not on a map basis.
European USA command has 20 IPCs income prior to war.
Pacific USA command has 32 IPCs income prior to war.

The regular NO are discarded, instead you get a war bonus economy like in the original game.

After war is declared:
European USA command has +10 IPCs income (30 Total).
Pacific USA command has +20 IPCs income (52 Total).

During NON-COM if USA wishes to do so, he can move units from EURO to PACIFIC map and vice-versa. These units will be in control of the other USA command starting from next turn.

Same rules apply to UK.

The special case of Russia: In order to avoid annoying Russian can-openers due to the turn order change, there’s a change on the relation between Japan and Russia:

Russia and Japan may NOT declare war between each others unless one of these criteria are fulfilled:

If there are less than 18 infantries split between the Russian Pacific territories of Amur, Sakha, Yakut, Siberia, Soviet Far East, Japan can declare war on Russia anytime.

If Russia production is 50 or more IPCs, Russia can declare war on Japan anytime.

If Berlin is in Allies hands, Russia can declare war on Japan anytime.

its another house rule that I had dug up in another forum that allows artillery to “shell” or bombard an adjacent territory for 1 ipc per shot

oh wow that will be helpful…

Yeah, on that note, I may have voted for Game Balance, because what’s the point of playing if the scales are already tilted one way? But that’s mostly in reference to playing Traditional. Our standing house rule is basically, “Never play the way WWII actually went down. Switch up allies whenever a nation gets eliminated.” If you do it that way, versatility usually comes about of its own accord. :wink: