G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

@yazoinkergrapft

well just a FYI but Krieghound wrote the rulebook so there is no higher authority :)

@baron-Münchhausen Well its to make the things Germany needs to do well-- without a disaster to have a good game. The margins are tight in sz 7, also to avoid piling on decisively in Egypt.

Regarding Sealion G2: Some guy says buy 2 CA and 2 AP and have the Medd BB attack the UK CA with 1 AP landing 1 Inf in Gibraltar. Landing 3-4 Tanks, 3-4 Men, 5 planes, and 3 CS SBs VS> UK builds of 7 inf, 1 fighter plus landing US bomber and all UK planes and 1 UK tank… I will try it 3 times in practice games, but i doubt it.

Just some thoughts on how I might implement a TSRR rule in our Global game. I feel this may help out in the bidding process. If Russia can get it’s troops back to Moscow, the Allies may not need such a high bid.

A -The Trans-Siberian Railroad was made to bring mass troops from all over Russia. Therefore, ALL troops gathered along the Trans-Siberian Railroad countries may move freely from one end to the end on Russia’s NON-COMBAT move. This move may only go ONE WAY OR THE OTHER! There was only one rail and it took 8 days from end to the other. This railway may ONLY be used by Russian troops. The route exists along Russia to Samara, Samara to Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk to Tunguska, Tunguska to Yenisey, Yenisey to Yakut SSR, SSR to Buryatia, Buryatia to Amur.

B - Exceptions: If Axis controls any country of The Trans-Siberian Railroad, it is then sabotaged and no longer functions until Allies liberates. It then can be used on its FOLLOWING non-combat move.

C - The Trans Siberian Railroad may bombed by Tac/Strat Bombers the same as Naval and Air Bases. (See Rule Book)

@baron-Münchhausen

I reviewed the 2 hits Battleship values to 2.5 multiplier factor.
It is an approximation but this is easier to use this value if you need to assess between two naval fleet during a live game with no AACalc allowed.

It is based on the very even (almost 50%-50% survival equilibrium ) combat between 1 Destroyer @2 and 1 Cruiser @3 against 1 Battleship, 2 hits @4.
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=1&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=&dBom=&dTra=&dSub=&dDes=1&dCru=1&dCar=&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat-Tra&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=

1 Destroyer @2 and 1 Cruiser @3
5 pips * 2 hits = 10 pips*hits

1 Battleship, 2 hits @4.
4 pips * 1 BB worth 2.5 hits = 10 pips*hits

@bakerbei

maybe you can get a message to him here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NHFOPGhzfI

I made little changes and a few tests in Pacific.
In PTO, I reduced US double Subs and DDs into single one.
It gives many interesting little and epic Naval battles in the first and second rounds.

Adding one additional TP in Japan SZ makes for a more dynamic and fast explosive deployment into main land Asia.
Japan can now better rivaled with Szechwan IC in second and third rounds or get to all money islands at the cost of loosing TPs.

IDK how would do a conservative player since all I tried is as many big naval combats within reach in the first two rounds.

Here is a picture.
I will do more game tests and then write the complete set-up, of the final version to be experiment in a F-2F game.

@Argothair:

Yup, I’m a big convert to Anniversary. I own both games, and I’ve played more Spring '42 2nd Edition (1942.2) than I have Anniversary, but that will change over the next couple of years, because now I almost exclusively play Anniversary.

1942.2 is maybe one hour shorter than Anniversary on average, but the price you pay to save that hour is having to put up with ridiculous sea zone configurations (America typically needs three separate stacks of transports to be effective in Europe) and weird, crunchy flight paths that force you to send fighters from California on turn 1 through Australia and India so that they can reach West Russia in time to stop the German advance.

1942.2 does have some interestingly tight/sharp trading in eastern Europe; I like the territory divisions in Eastern Europe better in 1942.2 than in Anniversary. Instead of being rapidly forced back to Moscow, Russia has a real chance to stack in West Russia or Archangel through the middlegame, and the Germans can be defeated if they over-invest in the pricey 6 IPC tanks and then let those tanks be killed by efficient stacks of Russian infantry and fighters.

There are also interesting possibilities in 1942.2 if you adopt a “US goes first with a non-combat turn and extra purchase,” which tends to re-arrange the entire board and perhaps even allow for a small Axis bid.

That said, the well-designed eastern european front is not enough to save 1942.2 from its otherwise terrible starting setup. With no bid, the Allies will be pushed out of Egypt, China, Siberia, the central Pacific, and the north Atlantic sea zones no matter what they try to do about it. The British are wedded to their disaster of a factory in India, which deprives them of the income needed to make a real contribution in the Atlantic. Because Australia, China, Malaya, Burma, and Hawaii are all 1-IPC territories, the Allies have nowhere in the Pacific that makes sense a a place to build a factory as a forward base. Meanwhile, the Japanese have no reason at all to go south or east, and so in every game they either seize the British Indian factory and use it as a base to attack Stalingrad, or plow through China/Siberia and attack Moscow. There is no Battle of Midway or Battle of the Coral Sea or Battle of Guadalcanal; instead the Japanese get to do a bizarre repeat of the Pearl Harbor attacks, even though it’s supposed to be Spring 1942 instead of December 1941. There is no Battle of El Alamein or Battle of Kasserine Pass; instead the British get thrown out of Egypt and the American Atlantic fleet is sunk in its entirety by German subs before the Americans even get a turn, which means that when the Americans finally do make it to Morocco, they land with overwhelming force. The setup is rigid, unbalanced, ahistorical, and ultimately unrewarding.

SanFran1941_Baron_Alpha07.png

And that would reflect what the Allies actually did in 43 when they invaded Italy via Sicily.

@Imperious:

Tanks could go to 5$ not less, or game imbalanced. Heck for $4 id only buy tanks.

Done

actually perhaps you get discount of 1ipc but you must buy in two’s

complimented it with mobile industry instead, makes for a tough choice against “Trans-Siberian Railway”

Id rather you go with “Rasputita” and create a winter rule in Russia twice per game that effects Axis units in some manner.

There’s a Russian Winter rules in the “Alternative Rules” portion of Delta found here…

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33730.0

All the discount units creates imbalanced games, certainly because we got 5 allies and 3 axis, so allies have a +2 advantage just in these rules.

Perhaps, but the Axis have the slight advantage when it comes to the “Strategic Objectives” portion of Delta found here…

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33734.0

I think only Russia and USA should have any advantage that effects prices. The other nations didn’t have capability to build cheaper units.  Colonial troops should only be something that allows placement in some area w/o having a factory ( just one unit per turn).

Perhaps, we’ll find out more when some play test reports get posted.