@Baron:
Agree about casualty selection Baron. So Interceptors hit at 2 and escorts 1, no bmbr hits for pre raid ? That’s how it’s setup right now
@Baron
Attack 0 in SBR ? Not following.Didn’t mean to push :)
Is easy to change
Ahh…I misunderstood. Interceptors should be 1 as well. Let me know and I’ll change it.
Yes. I’m still working on your first numbers.
Let us the original file as it is. If someone want to test.
Just bring a new additional one with Fg A1 D1.
StB A0 C5 D6 damage vs Fg A1 D2 get no positive results.
You need to rise to D6+2 damage to get acceptable odds against D2 Fighter:
Break even point StB A0 C5, 1D6+2 damage vs Fg A1 D2: 21 StB vs 30, Fgs: 0.700 StB/Fg
1StB D6+2 vs 1Fg D2: + 3.056 - 2.222= + 0.834 IPC damage/SBR12= +10.008
1StB D6+2 vs 2Fgs D2: +2.037 - 3.148 = -1.111 IPC damage/SBR9= -9.999 (Diff.: +0.009)
21 StB vs 30 Fgs: 0.700 StB/Fg
No FIT (Fighter Interception Threshold), always beneficial to Intercept.
This is much less efficient than OOB G40 0.526 StB/Fg
But still better than Balanced Mode 1.156 StB/Fg
I crunch some numbers on StB A1 D0 C8 1D6+2 damage vs Fg D2 C10.
It appears that Break even point is around 2 StBs for 3 Fgs giving 0.667 StB/Fg.
This is slightly less efficient than OOB G40 0.526 StB/Fg but compared to Balanced Mode (1.156 StB/Fg) it is far much better to get more SBRs.
(Break even point: 89 StBs A1 C12 D6+2 vs 77 Fgs D2 C10 : 1.156 StB/Fg)
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37653.msg1521517#msg1521517
Right on Baron. Here they are with interceptors hitting at 1.
https://www.sendspace.com/file/kgazux
with M3 naval
https://www.sendspace.com/file/kfddmz
Open the zip and put the folder inside the downloaded maps folder which is inside your triplea folder.
Thank you very much Barney.
Baron
Awesome! Thanks Barney!
Just to the point about move 3 making crossings a bit easier. I think designer intent needs to be measured against the gameplay here. Forcing an extra turn into each ocean crossing makes it possible for the coastal defender to simply adopt a ‘wait and see’ approach, taking no action until the last possible moment. Meanwhile the attacker is forced to telegraph their intentions over a full round of gameplay.
I’m just not sure it is really so desireable to force a one turn gap for each ocean crossing. It has the effect of making it much more difficult for the attacker to get anything going, with a drag on dynamism and the overall pace of play. For my part, I think a 1 turn crossing on either side of the board has potential to make the game more exciting. It doesn’t completely remove the incentive to stage, because you will generally want to have reinforcements at the ready nearby, when the main invasion occurs. I think you are somewhat less likely to see a dead drop on France straight from E. US as the first maneuver, but rather a staging in UK first, and then the dead drop (so you can support the play with an immediate shuck.) Same deal on the Pacific side. I think you are likely to see a set up landing first (to activate the shuck on reinforcements) and then the main invasion. But if the player chooses not to announce their intentions in this way, then a more direct assault is also something that always has to be considered.
The multi-turn crossings are what currently allows Germany to leave France totally undefended (no Atlantic wall) until the last second. Similarly USA can leave W. US totally undefended until the last second when they notice Japan trying to set up in Alaska or wherever. Japan can do the same, leaving the home island undefended until they see America coming etc. Move 3 replaces that situation with one that requires a little a more advanced planning on the defenders part, and somewhat less advanced planning on the attackers part. I think this would make for a game that is more action oriented all around, with a much faster pace, and a greater likelihood that the VC win becomes more climactic.
heh heh tried a few G1 openers. Think the Bmbrs could prove quite entertaining. Still not sure on the M3 naval, but bringing the CA keeps 110 and 111 about the same.
Haven’t tried a SL or slamming a bunch of subs at the UK CA in 91 yet. Anyway keeps ya from being lazy and makes you think anew : )
Sorry to spam out here but if you haven’t tried it, these bombers are a lot of fun. This is the closest I’ve seen a A&A game come to as far as representing SBR. Having them cheaper means you use them more. It’s no big deal if one gets shot down (except to the poor bastards in it), interceptors are protected, unless there are escorts, and the UK has been taking a heck of a lot more damage than usual :)
I could see the US actually being able to bomb Germany to effect. I wonder if we should give minors, AB and NB max damage 8 ? Make bombers a little more powerful. I left Tacs with SBR ability. Was that desired ? Seems ok to me if it was.
Anyway, give it a spin. Haven’t messed with naval M3 too much yet. Don’t want my brain to go into Fukushima mode : )
Sorry to spam out here but if you haven’t tried it, these bombers are a lot of fun. This is the closest I’ve seen a A&A game come to as far as representing SBR. Having them cheaper means you use them more. It’s no big deal if one gets shot down (except to the poor bastards in it), interceptors are protected, unless there are escorts, and the UK has been taking a heck of a lot more damage than usual :)
I could see the US actually being able to bomb Germany to effect. I wonder if we should give minors, AB and NB max damage 8 ? Make bombers a little more powerful. I left Tacs with SBR ability. Was that desired ? Seems ok to me if it was.
Anyway, give it a spin. Haven’t messed with naval M3 too much yet. Don’t want my brain to go into Fukushima mode : )
Interesting feedback
I believe TcBs C12 with SBR A1 D0 should allow bombing on IC too now.
Since it is so a high cost compared to 5 IPCs, why make such a difference to limit against AB or NB?
After all, StB C5 Dmg 6 now are 2.4 stronger than TcB C12 Dmg 6.
Or, on 60 IPCs basis, 12 SBs gives 12 D6 compared to 5 TcBs giving 5 D6 damage.
On damage, any Maxed out facilities is an incentive to repair.
Better to maxing out more easily I believe.
Glorious!
It was my hope that the bomber change would be fun! Excited to check this out when I get off work.
:-D
M3 is more of a moon shot in my view. I honestly don’t know how it will pan out, or if it will provide the entertainment value I’m hoping for. But at least we got a bomber alternative on offer now!
Thanks again dude
ps. I know for M3 to work in G40, we’d need a US destroyer in sz 8 for balance. That’s my simplest solution for the moment, to at least make the M3 rule playable.
@Baron
so give Tac a hit at 1 when battling interceptors and let it bomb factories too ? Sounds good to me.
I was thinking max 8 damage on minors and bases but still have them operational at 2 damage. Might be too much. With these cheaper bombers bases should take more of a pounding anyway. It’s always seemed a little to easy to get them (bases) back in operation to me.
@Black_Elk
Glorious is right ! You’ll have a blast ! I haven’t played a whole turn let alone a game yet but might need to trade a German bomber in for a sub and give Japan an extra inf or two for the Yunnan attack. As you know a few minor tweaks might be necessary to the start but after that let it Roll !
I’m really surprised by how well this seems to work. Is still early but seems way cool to me :-D
Great. Looking forward to more reports on this.
I dig it :-D
It feels so sweet to have the 5 spot back! Didn’t realize how much I missed it.
I don’t have a strong opinion on the max damage for bases etc just yet, probably because it didn’t factor into my games very much before. Though I guess that should probably change now haha.
Any chance we could try one of these for 1942.2 as well when you get the time? With the defensless stratB? or defenseless straB and M3 ships?
Just so I could mess around with it. Not to tempt fate with a nuclear meltdown, but I’m having too much fun with this HR brinkmanship. Curious how it might hold up on the smaller scale.
:-D
I just reread the first 10 pages of this thread, to see what impact the defenseless bomber might have on the grand plan.
I was looking at CWO’s list from the first page.
@CWO:
EUROPE MAP
Eastern Europe
- The German-Soviet land war
Western and Central Europe
- The Anglo-American strategic bombing campaign against Germany
The Atlantic and the North Sea
- The German naval campaign against Allied merchant shipping
The Mediterranean
- The battles for North Africa and Southern Europe
PACIFIC MAP
The Central Pacific
- The struggle for control of island bases in the Central Pacific
The Southern and Western Pacific
- The battles for the Solomons and New Guinea
Southeast Asia
- The struggle for Burma and the threat to India
China
- The ten-million-man Sino-Japanese stalemate in partially-occupied China
I think for a one off, this HR does a pretty good job of creating the conditions necessary for the Anglo-American bombing campaign in Western and Central Europe. It’s not really a victory condition here, but at least we’d have a mechanic in place that allows for that campaign to be more significant to the gameplay overall.
So just using the list as a rough guide, at least we’re a bit closer to 1 out of 8 haha
As long as the SBR damage is between 7 - 14 a turn on a Major Factory. I don’t want to see max damage every turn.
I know ave. damage per bomber is 3.
Baron, no need to post numbers. I saw them. Just thinking if went to 1D6 +2 may be to strong.
@SS:
As long as the SBR damage is between 7 - 14 a turn on a Major Factory. I don’t want to see max damage every turn.
I know ave. damage per bomber is 3.
Once you get a D6 damage roll, it is 3.5, precisely.
But, from a Strategic POV, it is probably better to see it as a TUV swing of 2 IPCs per StBs.
This taking into account your bomber losses over a longer period.
So if you went 1D6 +2 be TUV swing of 3 or 4 ICPs ?
@SS:
So if you went 1D6 +2 be TUV swing of 3 or 4 ICPs ?
If you suppose most of SBR are against IC’s AAA only.
If you play within combat values Bomber A0 C5.
Using D6 damage (recommended ) avg TUV swing going to be 2.084 IPCs.
Using D6+2 damage (OP) avg TUV swing will be 3.750 IPCs.
(OOB G40 is actually 2.583 IPCs)
SBR HRules with StB A0 C5 and Fg A1 D1 C10: damage 1D6 or 1D6+2
1 Strategic Bomber doing SBR against no interceptor
AAA roll = odds casualties
5/6 StB survived * 5.5 IPCs = +4.583 IPCs or (D6) 5/6*3.5= +2.917
1/6 StB killed *5 IPCs = -0.833 IPCsD6: +2.917-0.833= +2.084 IPCs
D6+2: + 4.583 - 0.833 = +3.750 IPCs damage/SBR
Global40 SBR HRules : 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor, damage 1D6+2 / damage 1D6
5/6 StB survived *3.5 IPCs = +2.917 IPCs
5/6 StB survived *5.5 IPCs = +4.583 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *5 IPCs = -0.833 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *6 IPCs = -1 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *8 IPCs = -1.333 IPCsCost 5
1D6 (avg 3.5 IPCs): +2.917 - 0.833 = +2.084 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+2 (avg 5.5 IPCs): +4.583 - 0.833 = +3.750 IPCs damage/SBR
Cost 6
1D6 (avg 3.5 IPCs): +2.917 - 1 = +1.917 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+2 (avg 5.5 IPCs): +4.583 - 1 = +3.583 IPCs damage/SBR
Cost 8
1D6 (avg 3.5 IPCs): +2.917 - 1.333 = +1.584 IPCs damage/SBR
1D6+2 (avg 5.5 IPCs): +4.583 - 1.333 = +3.250 IPCs damage/SBR
G40 BMode
1D6+2: + 4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR run
Thank You Baron. :-D
Updated so Tacs can bomb factories and hit at 1 in air battle. Added Objectives tab.
Open the zip and put the folder inside the downloaded maps folder which is inside your triplea folder.
SBR Only
https://www.sendspace.com/file/a8173i
w/naval M3
https://www.sendspace.com/file/zi1i53
What version is 42.2 ? v4 ?
Sweet! Good looking out dude
1942.2 is v5
It’s pretty bare bones, so hopefully not to difficult to mod
:-D
here’s 42.2
https://www.sendspace.com/file/30jr8m
Delete your existing v5 zip in the downloaded maps folder inside triplea folder. This one has the original and the two mods.
I didn’t see any intercepting. The xml has it listed. It didn’t work in the original either though, so don’t know whats up with that
edit: fix bmbr price
