Why is the Eastern Front in G40 so boring?

I would not be G40 boxed set for a new rulebook or even for new French unit sculpts. However, I would buy a G40 boxed set for some combination of two or more of these changes:

1. Long standing balance issues were resolved officially instead of with the house rule hodgepodge we use now.
2. Historical inaccurances (Scapa Flow, Iceland, Sierra Leone, etc) were corrected on the map/setup (for instance, Iceland was occupied by the US on July 7th 1941, but the map shows it as a UK territory from the start).
3. There were cool new sculpts for multiple powers, and cleaned up sculpts for units that look too similar (ANZAC cruiser vs destroyer for instance, or corrected the 9 ft tall ANZAC infantry unit).
4. New map! For instance, eastern Russia is vast and would have been a Japanese sinkhole that brought no benefit, but in the G40 map those territories all actually produce income. The Global War map is a much better representation – combined German/Japan strategies that work on the current map would not work on Global War map.
5. Map supports faster setup – MICs and setup bases pre-printed, for instance.
6. Rule changes that allow the US to build bases on other Allies territories.
7. Rule changes to fix unit issues (cruisers!)
8. Separate control markers for UK Pacific vs UK Atlantic

Basically, a couple of big changes or a bunch of small changes make the investment worthwhile IMO.

Fixing NOs could be part of #1 – giving the UK an additional NO of no German navy in the Atlantic other than sea zone 112 would probably help the balance issue. Also, giving Japan an NO that costs it money if it DOESN’T control those islands once at war with the US might help the balance issue.

Marsh

@Marshmallow:

It would be even more effective if the US could spend its money to build bases on Allied territory, regardless of whether or not the US owned the territory.

For that matter, the US should also be able to produce units at the factories in France (as a whole) on its turn even after France (the territory) has been liberated. Historically, the US provided everything for the French army after the liberation of Paris – the French could not supply their own army at all after Paris was liberated.

Marsh

I take this idea further and use my bid to add 3 artilleries to the Russian stack.

It makes it a serious offensive force and a harder defensive force to deal with.

It allows US to project more power in the Atlantic because it shows Japan down.

I don’t see a flight path on the map that would be shortened by being able to fly over the Pripet Marshes, so I suppose that it’s not particularly relevant from an A&A perspective whether or not planes can fly over them.

@ShadowHAwk:

Though the rules are nice it would become hard to play games with a lot more rules, and if you shift the combat abilities of units be carefull not to change the starting balance 2 much. Currently the game is fairly balanced in terms of setup. Changing 1 or even a set of units to be more or less powerfull changes this balance.

ISO giving attacking air units a combat value and a bonus maby only limit this to attacking dive bombers, they needed air support to work.

I finally develop something which can work for both 1942.2 and G40.2.
A 3 planes-Carrier was needed.
In addition, the G40.2 Carrier A0 D3 M2 C16, 2 hits have now an in-built AAA defensive capacity, thanks Wild Bill.  :wink:
By the way, this improved and slightly stronger Carrier on offense and defense will make a better weapon to counter a Dark Sky Strategy.

The cost are reduced for planes and for many units because the interactions will be much deadlier than OOB, here is the thread:
Baron’s simplified TcB (less combined arms), Fg & 3-planes Carrier, full roster
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35643.msg1393799#msg1393799

About the overall balance, here is the trick for planes:
Initial set-up must be change a little:
all full Carriers (1TcB and 1 Fg) received an additional Fg (or a TcB).
Half loaded Carrier with TcB received 1 Fg.
Half loaded Carrier with Fg received 1 TcB.

The overall ratio is for each 2 Fgs you can add 1 Fg and for every 3 TcBs you can put on the start-up board 1 TcB.
Good luck to find the better place to put them.
Usually, it must be added on a given TT which already have plane(s) on it.

Alright, confirmed again! Thanks again for clarification, great to know you always get a competent reply asap!:)

If I recall triple a always had an option to view total # of rules and the # of times each result came up. I used to look at those things, fluctuation is like real life. I mean you flip a coin ten times, the odds of you getting 5 heads and 5 tails is 25%~ .  The odds of you getting exact average 1 2 3 4 5 6 rolls out of thousand of dice rolls… is pretty damn low. certain dice will show up more than others and it is different with every game, but over the course of thousands of games and millions of dice rolls, you get close to the average.

So you getting the results you got, is not exactly a surprise, but over two years I haven’t seen you play often so I don’t know how many games this is. Also keeping track of the unit being an AA gun, inf, fighter etc… is kind of silly since the dice server does not know what unit you are rolling, the program just takes the results from the dice server and uses that to tell you which units hit or miss… it is not trying to match 1 rolls with units that roll at 1.

normalized dice servers will increase the odds toward an exact average or they simply took a million rolls cut out strings of the same result and they follow a preset string.

I tend to stay away from dice server arguments, because I did not program them. Also a computer program can never truly mimic natural dice rolling, it can extremely close to it though, but I do understand why people only play in real life with the dice in their hands.
~
I have heard complaints of normalized dice results here. It all depends on the programming.