Grasshopper's 8 Sided System (G40)

We expect to release the latest Global 1940 Expansion Rule: Naval Task Force Commander no later than 16th December 2025.

This rule concerns:

More will follow soon…

The Captain

@Baron:

@SS:

Ya I like it too.
2 inf = A2 A25.0% total
1 inf+1 art = A4 A50% total makes up the drop for sure.
Cost ya 7 instead 6 icps.

Do you know how many Art are bought in a game on average for China ?

I hope it will be at least Arty A3 D2, so chinese Inf will get A2+A3 for 5/8 or 62.5% which is nearer the OOB 4/6 (66.7%) combined arms.

This little case also shows that China might be better with a strong Arty A3 D3 because defense 5/8 (62.5%) will be nearer OOB 66.7% for Art+Inf.
Otherwise, 50% 4/8 combined defense is a whole D6 pip below OOB 66.7%

China need something because japanese Fighter and TcB keeps their usual OOB 50% attack per unit.

Interesting idea about Chinese Inf at cost 2.
Mostly the case with AA50.

Baron Munchhausen have been using the ENIGMA (vann) FORMULAS on these proposals???

Great idea I will post mine tonight and any feed back would be great one thing your NO’s look like NA’s I’m thinking there is a way to do both keep balance in the game and stool have fun

Uncrustable,
why don’t use this game mechanics instead when attacking transports?

@Baron:

@Baron:

@Uncrustable:

Transports cost reduced to 6 IPCs.
-When empty may move 3 spaces during noncombat move. No transport may move 4 spaces
-Transport ‘evasive maneuvers’, each transport caught undefended by an attacking warship or plane may roll 1 dice. A roll of a 1 is a successful evasive maneuver and that transport is removed from battle and placed back on the game board, a transport that evaded an enemy attack while undefended may not unload units until its next turn.

This is another way to play a defenseless transport which should be added in this thread to be complete on the optional rule for this topic.

It makes me think about a similar but still a bit different way to played it also as a defenseless but not hopeless transport:

When there is no more warships/aircrafts to defend transports, then each transport roll and for each “1” rolled in a specific round, one TT can escape.
Attacker need to hit transport unit according to each attacking factor (ex.: subs @2/ DD @2 / CA @3, etc.) to destroy one transport.
Each round any un-destroyed transport which haven’t been able to escape can still trying to roll “1” to escape.

The combat end when, either all remaining transports have been able to escape, or have been destroyed.

Their will be no more auto-die, no combat unit will be destroy and the naval combat is done according to usual A&A system rule: a roll is needed to destroy any unit and no unit able to destroy more than 1 unit in the same combat round.

Since I play-tested it,
I say it is much more interesting than auto-die and more balance way to keep some surviving TT than destroying expensive attacking units (one way or an other).

I should add this detail:
transport can get their evasive roll as soon as their is no more warships or planes on their side at the end of a combat round.

Always attacking units can hit first, and it is only surviving transport which can get an evasive roll.

Which means, for instance, if their is 2 transports at the beginning of a round and 2 are hitten by attacker’s units then their is no evasive roll.

Well some are very similar. Ill try and write up a comparison of the two rule sets later.
Though I do prefer the tech token system in this rule set, tokens being 3 IPCs rather than 5, Success on 5-6, failure on 1-2, token awarded on 3-4

Im not sure if the game can handle ongoing costs……counting all your units at the end of each turn is going to get complicated.
Also, technically only units that move during a turn are expending oil…so shit would get crazy.

I like the idea of veteran infantry. I will always want the British SAS, US Marine Core, or Waffen SS fighting on my side (YES ALL OF THEM!). Also I’ve never like mechs. I think they should have just made trucks. A bit more complitcated but interesting.

Germany should have a reasonable chance to stop them or just have Germany cough up 16 ipc as soon as the Allies take NW Europe.  The way you have it set up Germany runs the risk of losing the fighter (10 ipc) just trying to stop it.  It adds up to alot of cash.  Maybe reduce the ipc amount lost 5-8 ipc.  I know that doesn’t seem like much but the amount of money Clint Eastwood & Telly Salvalus (sp  :-() were after was alot for a relatively small bunch of guys but would be maybe 10 ipc at most.  The money represents millions of working man hours not gold reserves.

I’m not trashing your idea, nothing wrong with it.  You could expand this thought to a Commando rule or Commando unit, drop them by bomber or transport to sabotage an enemy factory kinda like a SBR.  Enemy infantry could be the security for the factory and would have a chance to stop the Commando raid, if security fails its roll then Commandos do their sabotage & then retreat.  The Brits did alot of commando raids after Dunkirk just so they could hit back at the Nazis.