Concerns and Balance Problems with 42.2

In my opinion, the ultimate expression of anti-aircraft cruiser was built too late for the war: the US Navy’s Worcester class cruisers. Six twin-gun 6" turrets, with semi-automatic loading. They were capable of launching 144 rounds a minute at maximum rate of fire (12 rounds / minute per barrel, 12 barrels). Or, put another way, each of those 144 shells weighed 105 to 130 lbs, for a mass of about 7 1/2 tons of steel and explosives launched in the air. Every minute. I mean, when you’re done messing with Kamikazes…

Just, not commissioned until 1948…

-Midnight_Reaper

_Here’s a rule with two aims:

1. Safeguard Russian production (with some historical precedent) from relatively easy/early/immediate German poaching
2. More setup variety and more interesting potential play at the periphery of the map._
3. Enable/strengthen KJF and bilateral games.

The Rule:
During setup, do not automatically place any ICs in non-capital territories.  Instead, those ICs (and up to one AA unit/gun that accompanies it) may be placed in any territory controlled by their owner. The choice of where to place any starting ICs can be discussed openly, but should be made in secret and revealed simultaneously by all players.
Optional: If the UK does not start with at least one non-capital IC, allow it to place an IC+AA unit as well.

I think this works best with some of kind of mild incentive to encourage creative placements, so here are two versions of a bonus (pick one):

Bonus version A: Wherever a starting, non-capital IC is placed, permanently increase the IPC value of that territory by one (but not above 3).

Bonus version B: Whenever ANY non-capital IC is built or placed (for the duration of the game), permanently increase the IPC value of that territory by one (but not above 3).

Yes Dorowar my token system works really well. It adds a mission based element to the game that probably can’t be duplicated with any other type of house rule. It is such a game changer that you don’t need to put in a bunch of other house rules. Rolling the D6 first and then choosing the chart takes more chance out of WD than you might think and everyone should give that a try no matter how they play R&D. My guess is your play group will want to adopt that for sure.

I don’t know if you’ve ever played the 1914 Tournament Rules, but they have something there that is a specified threshold for each nation that puts them in economic collapse. Perhaps an idea for you might be to determine an IPC level for each nation that must be met in order to develop weapons in lieu of NO’s. That is kind of the same thing as what I do - force a nation to be worthy of developing a weapon. That combined with your research token and some cash and you start rolling for a weapon.

Whatever you decide to do let us know how it works. Some of the best ideas are the ones we get from others here.

Yeah we have about twenty guys in our Bay Area group.  Black Elk is also in our group just haven’t met him yet lol. Hopefully soon though.  A great group of guys who love A&A. :)

Forenote: many players out there insist the Allies are at an advantage; many also say that the Axis are at an advantage–like me. I particularly think Japan is at an advantage–particularly in China. So to balance this simply give the Chinese more units. Easy simple and makes it a lot funner for China and more fair to the Allies. So here is what you do: add 2 more infantry to Yunnan. This makes it pretty tough for Japan to knock out and gives China a much better chance for artillery turn one.
Now add 2 infantry to Chahar and Anhwe creating some more fights for Japan and a reduction in their forces. Note that Japan can still make a J1 attack without too many problems.

@Baron:

Young Grasshopper has made a video on YouTube  Cliffside Bunker Channel which explains clearly how it works in Global game.

Then you should read my thread on Convoy Disruption for 1942.2.
There is two mechanics invented to try.

Thanks again, took a look at YG’s YT channel and found the explanation for CD.  That clears it up nicely and now we can add that to the game as well.  Should be quite interesting to add this tactic.  He mentioned that it’s the responsibility of the player to point out to the other players where he can be CD’d.  Only thing I don’t necessarily agree with.  Should be the other person’s responsibility to keep an eye on the board for when/where they can CD.  Other than that it looks pretty straight forward now that I’ve seen it explained.

Taking a look at your thread as well.  :-)

oh ok.

ok