Axis basically lost in the first two turns

Agreed on the strat bombing. It’s too easy/damaging.

I see HBG has underground factory markers. This may be an option for those of us who “mod” our games.

Even if we reduce the amount of damage which the bombers can deal. I understand strategic bombing is a realistic dynamic as a rule but having no ready means of defence in a major industrial centre such as W. Germany makes no sense. Airfields are costly to build and it’s hard to believe none existed in that part of Germany from day one of the war. Strategic bombing was costly for the Allies as well. They were quickly disavowed of the belief that this method of warfare could end the war on it’s own. Rates if attrition in the bomber forces were high.

Of course, Germany can retaliate (and has!!!) but it’s like adding expense to expense buying all those bombers and necessary fighter escorts. Once the UK player begins they’re bombing campaign, from relative safety I may add, Germany really has not choice but to invest an onerous amount of IPCs into defence/retaliation. If U.S. bombers show up….

Worse yet, with the U-boats being cut down, the option of going for the convoy zones off the bad has been largely neutered. The boats are generally almost all eaten up by the early battles with the UK fleet.

Again, it’s not that strat bombing is bad in essence, it’s just that it, or air defence, could use some tweeking.

I’m really just brainstorming here but it’s nice to be able to bounce this off of you guys.

Unescorted bombing missions had attrition rates which were too high, however when escorted by fighters strategic bombing was instrumental to the ending of the war in both theaters. I believe an unescorted rule would help. If a fighter intercepts a bomber without fighter cover it hits on a 6 rather than a 3.

Profit by Mission
1 bomber vs AA = 3.88 IPC
1 Bomber vs 1 FTR = 3.08 IPC
1 Bomber vs 1 FTR and 1 AA = .2 IPC

Given current rules a single bomber flying against 1 FTR and an AA will produce .2 IPC in damage per turn. The bomber alone can not produce a scenario where it loses points. The defender must therefore over commit fighters to produce a negative outcome. Since fighters can not defensively respond to bombers the defender must station his fighters at each factory multiplying his defensive problem.

For example, 3 bombers in London would require 1 FTR in Paris, 3 FTRs in West Germany, 3 FTRs in Berlin, 1 FTR in Stettin, and 3 FTRs in Turin along with AAs in each location just to reach a point where they are only slightly losing. The Axis would need to commit an additional FTR to each location to create solid defense.

Bombers are currently one of the best ROI units in the game, up to a certain threshold. In fact, you could raise the cost of bombers to 20 and they would still be a ‘profitable’ unit if paired with a fighter.

(Mission profit assumes target is a major factory. It is slightly less positive for the bomber against minor factories. In fact negative for FTR+AA combo)

One option would be to alter damage to unit build ratio

Major Factory
0 Damage - 10 Units
1-2 Damage - 9 Units
3-4 Damage - 8 Units
…
19-20 Damage - 0 units

This would allow the defender to set his factories to levels that would produce negative outcomes to an attacker. For example I could repair the West Germany Factory to 16 points of damage (spending 4) and build 2 units. This would reduce the air campaign against Paris and West Germany to a 4 point loss per turn for the Axis without committing anything more than repair and AA. The Axis could still build 4 units per turn in the West. I rarely build more than this during turns 2 through 7 when the US is not in the war and not in a position to threaten the coast with sustained operation.

Sounds like a reasonable solution. Or over part thereof.

If the U.S. get’s in earlier, as they sometimes do, it may not be optimal.

Maybe there is a way to build better AA defenses for ICs? Fortifying, better AA, better interceptors,….

@Tigerman77:

@Ben_D:

The Dutch are pro-allied.  The Germans should never be able to get the Dutch navy under any circumstances.  All things Dutch get absorbed by the other allies when Holland falls.

Yes!!!  This only applies to Strict Neutrals……and of course the Vichy rule.

Does this mean the Greek navy doesn’t get scuttled/captured if Greece falls without being activated by UK?

Take Greece with UK on first turn and ships are UK’s. If you dont take Greece first turn the axis can take it and ships are theres.

Play testin game with 1 fort per territory only and the no ally of Russia can take strict neutrals. The new lend lease rule I’m not to fond of yet so not using that rule. Waiting for peoples comments on that without being played yet.

@SS:

Take Greece with UK on first turn and ships are UK’s. If you dont take Greece first turn the axis can take it and ships are theres.

This statement is inaccurate.  Refer to page 29 of the rules in the .pdf file of version 7.0 (the most recently published set of rules).

We been playing all games where if you take a pro  neutral you get land and ships and can move troops and non capital ships. If a strict,  land stays and roll for ships and either can’t move. I’m going to look at 7.1 rule.

Same rule.

Tigerman what is the correct rule? The one on page 29?

sophiedog, sorry if incorrect answer. If it is then we been playing it wrong.

This is what i’ve been told so far.

Pro ships go to activating player.
Strict neutral ships are rolled for.
If the pro neutral is attacked and capital falls, the fleet is rolled for by the occuping power.
Pro neutral ground troops can’t move until activated by player.

It specifically states that if the country’s capital tt is taken by force, whether it is either pro-one side or strict neutral, all of the remaining land units may only defend and cannot move or attack.  All of the country’s ships are then rolled for to see what happens to them.  This is in the 12th part (called Strict Neutrals) of the 4th section of the rules, on page 29.  Exceptions are described in other parts under the same section.

So yeah, you have it right there SS in your last post.

Yep, he’s right.

For instance, even if Warsaw falls to the Germans, Polish forces in E and W Poland do not move only defend.