[Global 1940] Air units fly over question

@FranceNeedsMorePower good point

@general-spengler Very interesting. I think having conscripts cost only $1 and be totally unable to attack is both a little sleepy and tends to give too much of an advantage to the defenders.

What about conscripts that cost $2, move 1, defend at 1 each, and attack at 1 as a stack? In other words, no matter how many conscripts you have in an attack, they all collectively only roll one die per round of battle, which only hits if the die is a 1.

This should naturally discourage players from building too many conscripts, since a stack of 5 conscripts is less cost-efficient than a single conscript.

You could also limit production of conscripts to 1 per factory and/or recruiting center per round. So if you have both a factory and a recruiting center in the same territory, you could buy up to 2 conscripts there per turn. If you have only a factory or only a recruitment center, then you could only buy 1 conscript per turn in that territory.

Hi @blaze-the-action-junkie

This is an interesting way of getting more tech rolls as well

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/13543/research-facilities-and-infrastructure-simple-rule-additions

@Cmdr:

Yea, I always wished that ABs added 2 to fighters/TBmbs and 4 to Strat Bombs…but that isn’t how it is, so my wishes be danged. lol

You can still HR that an AB on island TTy is treated like an Aircraft Carrier.
That way, StB or Fg going out only received only +1M bonus, but any Fg or TcB taking off and landing on the same AB gets a +2  bonus move.
This allows TcB and Fg to attack an island in another SZ and be able to land on the island Air Base. .

I’ve always felt the same way as the jetset. For me the dice rules are an important part of the narrative aspect of the game. They allow for more surprises or turn arounds or crushing upsets at the last minute, the kind of thing that allows you to build out a uniqur story around what just happened in a given combat.

I understand the appeal of Low Luck, but the gameplay is substantially different.  A build or combat strategy that is guaranteed to come off in LL, could fail miserably in a dice game. Sure you might be able to model averages for expected results using an LL scheme to map your strategy in a dice game, but there’s always a chance that the dice end up disagreeing with you ‘that time.’

In that respect I don’t see a huge amount of cross over. Playing 100 dice games won’t really prepare you or teach you a whole lot about what to expect in an LL game. As mentioned before low luck alters a lot of things, with respect to deadzoning and strafing, the number of defensive units required to back down an attack entitely, the way the airblitz works, the way anti aircraft fire works, etc. Just too many differences to really say that a strategy that anticipates the one style of combat is going to graph onto the other consistently.

I think after playing a few games, most players are able to determine which style of gameplay they prefer. If you love the consistency of LL, and hate the unpredictably of dice, then wait for a match with another LL player. If you hate LL, but love dice, then wait for a match against a dice player. Especially in a long game like global, if you start a playing with a combat system you dislike, then chances are that the game won’t be very satisfying for you. There are enough players out there who enjoy both ways of playing that you can probably find a likeminded opponent if you just stick it out for a little while.

To the initial question about why LL isn’t used more often, the answer is probably just because the manual doesn’t offer a description of how Low Luck works, or provide the kind official endorsement for that combat system that would probably be necessary for a larger groundswell of support. In regular tournament play it foes have a bit more cache, since that is where the systemperature was first put into practice… Fortunately for those who do enjoy Low Luck, tripleA  created simple “click tab” option in the game options menu, that allows any game to be played with universal LL rules, which I think has done a lot to popularize that style of play. There are also tripleA scenerios out there which were designed from the ground up with the LL playstyle in mind, which helps. I don’t know if the G40 designers took LL into account when they created the set up. If it was designed for LL, I imagine some of starting unit distributions might have been a little different. But again the game is pretty flexible, so even a game that wasn’t created with LL in mind, can still be adapted pretty easily, although the playtime required or the usual bids might be slightly different.

Sounds pretty cool but very complicated. Implamenting something like this opens up a whole can of worms becouse if you have these, what about PT boats? They were fast attack boats armed with torpedeos and depth charges. if you want these type of units you have to move the game into a 12 die system. 6 die cannot support anymore units that are currently in the game.

Deleted my prior post…I put it in the wrong forum!  :oops:

Thinking about AAA role, maybe it could be a more active unit during the rest of the battle and not limited only to the opening fire phase:

@crusaderiv:

AAA - Always Active Antiaircraft
Every round of combat they get a roll @ 1, against each plane.
Geez…that’s a strong AA! I’won’t take the risk to fly over your territory!
OK against 1 plane each round but not each plane.

New rules for AAA:
On first round, AAA get a preemptive antiaircraft strike (as per OOB rules):
3 Att @1 against up to 3 aircrafts, limited to one roll per plane.
After first round, each AAA get 1 Att@1 against 1 aircraft but as regular strike, not in the opening fire phase.
If Air Supremacy Rule: 1 AAA can block up to 3 planes from striking on the opening fire phase.

This will somewhat reduces the advantage of AirSupRule and did’t let the AAA be a lame duck for the rest of a ground battle.
What do you think? Did someone ever try this combination of two house rules?