Concerns and Balance Problems with 42.2

I really like the idea of 1 IPC per valueless allied pacific island. I am going to propose that to the group I play with, because we are always looking for a way to balance the game, but at the same time try to keep it as close to OOB as possible.

What we have been doing for several games, and it is working well, is this:

Play “cry uncle” - so no Victory City win condition for Axis.
Germany not allowed to build factories in original German controlled territories.
USA can do whatever they want in the European theater only, right away in turn one.

The whole problem lies on Japan’s absurd overpowerness. No matter what house rules are present, Japan will always take Soviet far east and China. Allies have nothing to prevent it.

Why Japan’s role is always trying to rescue Germany via marching to Moscow? Why Japan always outproduce Germany and USA? It is neither fun, nor historical plus it totally deprives Pacific front and two ocean going approaches for USA.

Typically USA esablish a pipelines in North Africa while abandons Pacific, Britain in N.Russia, Germany turning into surviving mod waiting Japan to recue. I’m really sick of to see the same thing.

The solution is make Germany 2 times stronger than Japan considering 1942 borders, make Soviet far eastern and Chinese territories less valuable (Making two territory worth 1 with Nos), Hawaii factory with 2ipc value, then rebalancing.

@Der:

Planes WERE historically superior to ships as far as bang for the buck - that’s why carriers replaced battleships.

That is correct, but the 1940 fighters did not got the range to sink the Royal Navy in the real war. Taking off from Normandy they barely crossed the English Channel and got 10 minutes of operational time before they run out of gas. In this A&A game a Fighter unit can easily cross the Atlantic and sink everything afloat. And that is not historical correct, and I doubt it make the game better

UPDATE: Screenshot & TripleA save game file!

Note that both the map and the saved game are missing the neutral units (including French & Dutch), because the WW2v5 map in TripleA doesn’t allow for neutral units, but this should still save you a lot of setup time if you’re interested in playtesting the 1939 scenario.

AAA screenshot 1939.png
Argo 1939.tsvg

@wittmann:

I agree that the Leningrad NO should go. Germany can�  easily capture the city and start building there. Why give it 5 bonus too?

I think that capture a city, or a Capital, should give you a one time bonus. You can plunder a city once, not every day year after year. Now that should put a stop to the back and forth  trading of capitals too.

Iron trade with Sweden and Lend Lease convoys should of course give you NO money every turn

@Navalland said in Balancing Cruiser (CL) and Battleship (BB) units with other A&A units:

I’m interested in playing customized 1942.2 with Italian presence and armours with 5ipc cost.

Better to talk about it on the thread you started, to not derailed this one.
Can you send the link?

This is a new concept to make SBR more effective and also speed up the game by causing a reduction in placements based on a portion of damage caused by SBR.

All Factories now have maximum damage rating according to this calculation:

Part 1:
All Factories now have maximum damage according to this calculation:
Factory type + Territory IPC

So in North Italy a major at 10 and territory at 4 means the factory can be bombed for damage up to 14 points

So a major in Germany at 10 and the TT at 5, means Germany can be bombed for 15 Points max

Part 2:
When repairing damage, all damage sustained greater than the total placement value of the factory are always repaired first.

Part 3:
If damage exceeds the factory placement total, additional placements must wait till the next turn to be reset.

Total damage - Total production capability ( rule #1) = value - factory production capability= total placements in the current turn.

If Germany has 12 points of damage and decides to pay for all repairs, it will only be able to place 7 units THIS TURN, and 10 units next turn ( provided it does not sustain new damage the next turn)

12-15=3-10=7

If Russia ( worth 4) has a Major factory and sustains 8 points of damage, it will only be able to place 6 units this turn and 10 the next turn.

8-12=4-10=6

If the Soviets have a minor factory in a space worth 2 IPC and it gets bombed for 4 points of damage and the Soviets pay the 4 IPC to repair, They will only be able to place 2 units THIS TURN, and 3 units next turn ( ( provided it does not sustain new damage the next turn)

4-5=1-3=2

Lets now use a slightly different example:

Germany has been bombed for 12 points, but fixed only 8 damage points…net 4 unfixed. Germany can only build 4 units this turn and if they don’t fix the damage next turn, it will remain at 4 units

In this case unfixed repair points alter the maximum total sustainable value.

So in this case its normally 15, but now changed to 11 ( this is true as long as you don’t repair all damage).

8-11 ( you must use this new basis)= 3-10= 7 units now and each turn as long as you got 4 unfixed.

Another example:

UK has a major worth 10 and the TT is worth 6 IPC= total 16 maximum damage rating.

They suffer a SBR totaling 14 points, but fix only 6 of these leaving 8 unfixed.

14-8 ( this is her new total capacity because the other 8 was not repaired)= 6-10=4 units.

I am sorry for all the examples but i am trying to really make this clear. To me this is really simple, its just the way to explain it is hard, but once you get it you really can see the magic behind this rule. I consider it one of the best ideas to fix the SBR and give it more weight in the game.

Also my final rule on tactical bombers is somewhat altered:

Every 2 tactical bombers roll 2 dice in SBR and you must pick the higher of the two dice in this roll.

or

If you have only one tactical bomber used in SBR, roll two dice and you must pick the lower of the two dice in this roll.

In AARHE we plan to make the AA piece represent infrastructure defence.

This is much needed as the game do not model any of that (defences). Amphibious assault against German fortifications (eg. Western Europe) should be a very different story to a casual landing on one of the Pacific islands, or Africa.

Infrastructure defence would consist of coastal batteries, anti-air guns, etc.

As for balancing in this case, a modest study of historic specifications leading to a a good model would avoid any strange/funny situations.