G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

@FranceNeedsMorePower France only needs a infantry in Normandy.

@Vendetta

Thank you for clarifying!

@hengst yea i read through them again. Some cool ideas. The End Points are interesting. Kind of a Railroad type thing. For Land anyway.

Got a couple other things going, but yea, gonna check it out some more :)

@franklin_cain Russia probably go hard at it. They kinda do for the spread of commiesm anyway. Not that those TTys provide it, there just in the way.

Don’t see anything wrong with it. Allies probably get it more than Axis. They and Russia are at a disadvantage oob anyway

I would use these rules:

(1) if the defender sees a key battle coming and can predict that they’ll want an unusual order of loss, they can leave a note, send an e-mail, etc., informing the attacker of their preferred order of loss, and the attacker will then follow that order.

(2) if there is no note, the attacker will provisionally use a standard order of loss.

(3) after seeing the results of the battle, the defender can pay 2 IPCs to the bank per casualty that they want to switch. You didn’t want to lose your bomber after all? Fine, pay 2 IPCs, and you can have your bomber back in exchange for one of your infantry. This should be expensive enough to deter casual abuse but still cheap enough that if you would really be upset about the order of loss, you can fix it without too much drama. Don’t think it’s fair that you should have to pay to set up your order of loss exactly the way you want it? Well, then, you should have foreseen the battle and given orders in advance. Don’t feel like thinking that hard every turn? Well, then, you can always just cough up 2 IPCs. It’s a way of speeding up the game while making sure that nothing unacceptably bad will happen because of order of loss issues.

CWO Marc I am not talking the Tech, but rather the availability of Sonar for ASW on ships designed for ASW and not the U boat threat but rather U boats attacking in unison.
Another factor with historically accurate concepts has to be playability without getting overly complicated.

IE German assault guns over tanks was lack of resources….and the availability of chassis from outdated tanks like the PZ ll and PZ 38t to create a need in Self propelled Artillery and Anti-Tank vehicles. I assure you that the Tanks were preferred over assault guns. This concept has morphed in house rules to what these assault guns were actually intended to do. A Panzer Division commander would rather be supplied Panthers over JagdPanthers

Today I removed the “Beach Head” rule and added this…

Enola Gay
During the SBR step in the combat phase of America’s 12th turn, they may use 1 American strategic bomber (including a Boeing Fortress) to drop an atomic bomb on 1 enemy territory within range of the chosen air unit. If the strategic bomber passes all air defenses (using same rules as SBRs) than that bomber will have successfully dropped it’s payload with the following damage: All facilities on the targeted enemy territory immediately sustain maximum damage, and the IPC value of the territory has now been reduced to zero.

Hello,

Recently a few A&A.org members collaborated on a simple house rule variant called “Halifax Rules” in order to balance 1940 Global 2nd Edition in a way that is both fun and fair. These rules are based on 3 game mechanics which are a single economy for the United Kingdom, the creation of a small Commonwealth nation, and a 3rd production unit that may build up to 5 units. You can view the thread here…

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34111.0

For a long time the G40 community has been looking for something universal to balance the game between the two sides. However, Larry Harris does not seem interested in addressing the problem, and the forum members can’t agree on which house rules to implement, so we always fall back and use the boring bid system.

Halifax rules offers something that players have been wanting for a long time, like freedom to spend the UK income where they wish, and with less restrictions. The idea of a Commonwealth nation has been around since to conception of the 1939 Variant Global War. Halifax is particularly special because Krieghund himself has called the project “interesting” and has even offered his own ideas to improve the set.

All I’m asking is to visit the thread, read the house rule, and give it a +1 rating if you like it. If you can find time to play test it and share your results with the rest of the community… that would be fantastic. However, all we need right now is your vote. If we can unite the G40 community around this, we could get sticky thread status, and hopefully an endorsement from Krieghund… this is our goal.

Thank you

YG

@Imperious:

The map should be marked for possible landing sites. It is not a fact that major landings could take place “anywhere”.
True but it is too much zoom-in tactical level geography.
Let’s suppose the amphibious assault is made in an appropriate places.
The bad or good luck of the first roll of dices in combat is making for a good or bad landing place.

First, the attacker should only be able to attack with infantry only on the first round ( and air units). This would be rolled after SB is performed.
AAA fire then Shore Bombardment are the first two steps. At a tactical level, artillery and armor have a bad moment to pass through during landing phase. The issue is to figure it all at strategical level and keep balance.
I suggested this penalty can be enough:
instead of saying all A1 for the first round of an Amph. Assault
Just say all attacking ground units get -1A to a minimum of A1, for the first round.
Hence, Artillery get A1.
But, at least Armor can get A2.
And according to this HR, even an Inf getting A2 for being paired with Art is reduced to A1.  
But, at a strategical level, the SB can give a little support to Infantry unit trying to land.
That’s why:

During the first round of an Amph. Ass.
Destroyer, on a 1:1 basis, give +1A boost to 1 Infantry unit.
Cruiser,  on a 1:1 basis, give +1A boost to 1 Infantry unit, in addition to the shore bombardment.
Battleship, on a 1:2 basis, give +1A, to up to 2 Infantry units, in addition to the shore bombardment.

So the warships heavy guns can make a difference (even Destroyer’s one), on landing round.

Second, Defending Infantry and Artillery should fire preemptively ( loses taken first do not fire in subsequent rounds)
This is a tough one, do we give it to Artillery unit only or to both units?
Here I followed Razor and also you, at the strategical level, and for balance (too much Inf vs Art), and for simplicity and also because 1914 give it only to Artillery unit. And it will be a weaker ones however:
All Artillery units get a preemptive strike (like subs) against incoming units.

Third, all remaining attacking units roll, then remaining

The attacker should be able to retreat, however all mech units are converted into infantry ( they leave the beaches with equipment…ala Dunkirk)
That one is new. It is alien to A&A system to convert 1 unit into another.
However, a retreat possibility could be interesting…
But usually the better units will survived last. This means it will probably be armor or artillery…

Instead, it can be something like this:
If amphibious assault units needs to retreat (at the beginning of the round), attacker must loose 1 Armor unit or 1 Art unit before any other 1 casualty.
Basically, attacker must loose 1 additional ground unit (the costlier and valuable one), and this unit cannot fire, then return the surviving units on landing barge (transports).
On most occasion this will mean 1 armor unit, an A3D3, 6 IPCs unit.

Thanks for this idea about amphibious assault retreat.

It can even more create an incentive for the defender, to throw an air/naval assault on transports to get ride of the surviving retreating units. Rarely see, ground troops going into the bottom of the ocean with transports units.