Should we make better rules for invadable neutrals? (1940)

@shadowhawk said in [Global 1940] Changing AA in the game:

Well atm they are free hps. After the pre-combat shots they dont do anything in the fight except take a hit. So as a defender unless its clear im winning the first hits go to the AA, they are dead weight at this point.

When they can return fire every round against planes ( might want to keep the @1 because they target units ) then it might give the defender a reasonable choice.

I agree. I thought when you said that you were referring to the version with your house rules, not the out of box version.

IMO they represent flak88 batteries, a bit more specialised AA guns then the divisional version but a lot weaker then the static stuff that defends ports/airfields and the likes.

Agreed.

I guess trout really likes the Hvy Bmbrs :)

@Trout heh heh site been whacked almost daily for a while now :) Everything slow or unavailable. But it liked your post :)

I liked it too RightArm.png

Here are our updated rules. Added some new pieces and changed a few Enhancements. TheBunkerRulesV3.pdf

@CWO:

I’m not sure I understand the concept of a Pearl Harbor attack involving no Japanese ships, since the whole operation revolved around the use of a Japanese carrier strike force to bring the attacking aircraft into range of Pearl Harbor.  Japanese aircraft in 1941 didn’t have the range to fly all the way to Hawaii from Japan and all the way back again.  The closest that Japan ever came to doing anything like that were one or two very small bombing raids carried out against Hawaii by (if I recall correctly) a couple of flying boats from Kwajalein Atoll.  These flying boats – Emilys, I think – were big and slow and clumsy, could hardly have done much damage, and would have had to fly unescorted since no Japanese fighters had the equivalent range.

As for the Doolittle Raid, it was carried out by B-25 Mitchell medium bombers, not by tactical bombers.  The rule section about these normally land-based planes being carrier-launched is correct (they used special training and techniques to launch from a flight deck), but the rule would have to be more precise than just saying that “The US player can launch 2 TB from 1 carrier” because it doesn’t restrict the location of the carrier and it doesn’t specify that the planes have to fly a one-way mission.  In the actual raid, Hornet had to get close enough for the planes to launch, hit their targets and continue to China.  The planes didn’t have the range to return to the carriers, and in any case could never have made a carrier landing; the techniques they used to launch from a carrier couldn’t work in reverse to land on one.

Also, the pearl harbor attack included Jaanese subs. It wasn’t a pure air attack.

Hey Folks,

has anyone of you ever tried HBG “Battle Shapes (3D)” rules (fortifications, rockets, etc.) in your 1940-Global games? (www. historicalboardgaming.com/Battle-Shapes-3D-printed_c_425.html)
If ‘yes’, what are you’re experiences with them? Are they a great imrpovement? Or to expensive, unbalanced or simply unrealistic?

Your right it was. Thanks for the heads up. I wish I got that in a pm from the mod who moved it but oh well. Strange how discussions of rail, the board itself, bids, reductions of navy or any other tweak to the game didn’t end up there as well.

I was referring to sun tzu’s comments and land battles, sorry for any confusion

@dezrtfish:

Canned Factories allows factories to be moved 1 territory per turn. On the turn the factory is moved it may not produce units. Cost of new factories is reduced to 12Ipcs.

So do the moved factories still count as originals?

Otherwise, excellent!