G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread

@Karl7:

If FIC goes Vichy, is occupied by UK, UK DOWs on Japan, then Japan should be able to take it without nullifying the NO.

Yeah and you totally threw me off with your post at first because you said nothing about Vichy

I suppose you have a point.  The FIC rule was made when Vichy was not a thing.  You’re just like me, finding problems with the overlay of BM on 2nd edition (allied marines on cruisers)

It’s just so fun to give you a hard time because of your (beautiful and special) personality

Well balanced mod guys (Adam)?  All you have to do is add a statement to the Vichy rules to fix this.  I don’t know if the coding to TripleA is a big deal or not, but there are plenty of things we have to edit for anyway.

Cool, fix that, make Sicily adjacent to S. Italy and we are good to go!

Is there a list of proposed fixes?

@Karl7:

Cool, fix that, make Sicily adjacent to S. Italy and we are good to go!

Is there a list of proposed fixes?

I’m keeping a list.

Is it really worth the added complexity to fix such a small issue though?

I would say no FWIW
KISS

@Karl7:

Cool, fix that, make Sicily adjacent to S. Italy and we are good to go!

Is there a list of proposed fixes?

That would make the Axis significantly weaker I would think. Given that Allies are mostly considered to have the edge in BM, I can’t see it.

Would be really interesting if you limited the number of ground units that could cross from Italy to Sicily or Sicily to Italy to 2 or 3 per turn (without transports) but that would be a new, unique rule…

You could always house rule it with individual opponents, of course.  I mean, you don’t have to change the rules for everyone so that you can enjoy it

I joke about Sicily… that would be a game changer requiring other adjustments that I haven’t worked out…

The FIC thing is rare I enough I guess… but it is illogical

add it to the long list of illogicals  :-)

I was thinking that you needed to have uncontested naval control of the sea zone in order to ferry troops between Sicily and S Italy (and vice versa).

That’s a good idea, but I would think that should only work for Italy and not for the Allies.  That would be interesting.

@Gamerman01:

That’s a good idea, but I would think that should only work for Italy and not for the Allies.  That would be interesting.

You mean the Allies would not need to have navy in the sea zone to ferry troops?

No I meant Italy would not need to have navy in the sea zone to ferry troops, but the Allies should have to have something more as long as Italy controls South Italy

I don’t know how formidable the defensive position of the toe of the boot would be to repelling ferry attempts - I had to look up a map to see how close Sicily and Italy actually are, and I don’t know what the topography is like or how feasible it actually would have been for the Allies to get across to a hostile Italy

But regardless of terrain or geography, obviously, adding a way for the Allies to make landfall directly on the European continent and to be able to attack inward with no restrictions just as they could from South France or Normandy is huge - huger even than South France or Normandy because it is farther away from the Germans.

Obviously it would be a huge game changer if you just say Sicily borders South Italy, with no restrictions on the Allies.
Seems like you’d have to require some kind of naval presence - wait, I know -

You could just make it so that Italy can scramble from South Italy to defend against land invasions from Sicily to South Italy.  They would scramble against Z95.  Do you like that idea?

Could make it that Italy could freely attack Sicily unless there is an Allied surface warship in Z95 or if there is an airbase on Sicily the Allies could likewise scramble

If there is no naval or air attacking Z95 against a scramble, then a single scrambled plane prevents the ferrying.

You’re awesome Karl - this is good stuff

@Karl7:

So if UK take French Indo, declares war on Japan before USA is at war, and Japan takes back FI, the +10 is gone?

That doesn’t make any sense. The neutrality of FI was breached by UK, who then unilaterally declared war on Japan, so USA shouldn’t care if Japan takes a UK occupied FI.

I guess this is another example of BM creating illogicals that was not foreseen by the developers. Personally I think this is a minor one as at the end of the day the result is the same as in the vanilla game. You have Japanese forces in FIC. USA doesn’t care if UK declared war on Japan or not, USA does not like Japanese forces in FIC. Period. So really there is no difference compared to 2nd edition. But again the Vichy settings complicate things and makes things less logical.
A simple solution for this scenario could be that Vichy is only activated on the European map and FIC would stay French even after Vichy is activated. However, I am sure Regularkid will be against this for historic reasons……………

And for Sicily, don’t do it. Why would you do that?

Here’s my summary of Balanced Mod generally:

• SBR rules are almost perfect!
• Additional NOs are mostly fine. Just remove the USSR/Japan DOW affecting the Persian and Northern route lend lease. I don’t care so much either way for the Pacific LL NO.
• Med NOs spice up that area - agreed with that point.
• Vichy is pretty good
• Didn’t the Germans go after Leningrad because of the industry there, like the KV-1 tank factory? Wouldn’t it make more sense for it to be a USSR bonus rather than a German one?
• The real annoyance for me is the Chinese guerilla fighters. These swing the game far too much. You could remove these and go back to a 6IPC bonus for the Burma Rd. 3IPC doesn’t reflect the historical merit of it IMO.

Just a personal comment but I thought it would be worthwhile to post it.

I suppose some people are going to say that they wanted to weaken a J1 DOW.

@oysteilo:

@Karl7:

So if UK take French Indo, declares war on Japan before USA is at war, and Japan takes back FI, the +10 is gone?

That doesn’t make any sense. The neutrality of FI was breached by UK, who then unilaterally declared war on Japan, so USA shouldn’t care if Japan takes a UK occupied FI.

I guess this is another example of BM creating illogicals that was not foreseen by the developers. Personally I think this is a minor one as at the end of the day the result is the same as in the vanilla game. You have Japanese forces in FIC. USA doesn’t care if UK declared war on Japan or not, USA does not like Japanese forces in FIC. Period. So really there is no difference compared to 2nd edition. But again the Vichy settings complicate things and makes things less logical.
A simple solution for this scenario could be that Vichy is only activated on the European map and FIC would stay French even after Vichy is activated. However, I am sure Regularkid will be against this for historic reasons……………

And for Sicily, don’t do it. Why would you do that?

Actually removing FIC from the list of potential Vichy territories is a great idea, thanks.

A neat and elegant solution.

I also think making FIC unaffected by Vichy is a good call.