Advice to Renegade! What is on your top 10 for adjustments to G40 3rd edition?

@Eric-Poppleton well I tried it by myself some and it sorta worked. My goal was to get my buddies into the game and try it with them but we’re still in the learning phase-figured it’s only a valid test if they have developed strategies in the normal game

This mechanics can also be applied to ABs as Carolina is suggesting:

Air and Naval base damage
@Carolina:

Great topic - hi-lights how A&A is a little too basic.  ie. not all hits should be equal - really, when would AAA blow every plane out of the sky?

I would propose to change the AAA rule for bases and industry that AAA does not kill but affects the accuracy of the attacker.  Defending installation rules a 1d6 and this is subtracted from the attacker’s roll.  
1d6-1 for fighters and tacB
1d6-2 for bombers
Roll an AAA dice for each attacking aircraft.

thanks for responding…

@barney:

Looks like you’ve got it tuned in pretty good to me YG. Those all look good and equally obtainable for each side. Good work!

Thanks Barney… I agree, a couple are easy for both sides but they get really hard after that. Using it tomorrow in a game where it’s the only house rule.

Another way to play a 1942.2 game with some elements which can simulate air-to-air combat between Fighters or against Bombers are as follow.
This House Rule keep the same principles as the opening post system:

Fighters are having dogfight against other Fighters and Bombers and not just hitting grounds targets (as casualties chosen by owner’s) acting like a shield.

That Strategic Bombers are weak and vulnerable against Fighters in air-to-air combat.

But Strategic Bombers have a heavy payload of bombs against ground targets.

There is no special phase in this HR and the dogfight in SBR is consistent with the air-to-air combat value of Fighter and Bomber units.
However, it implies a few changes on combat values and cost of these units:

FIGHTER
Attack 2
Defense 2
Move 4
Cost 7
Always hit enemy’s aircrafts first, if any available.
A Destroyer must be present to hit submarine.

Strategic Bombing Raid Escort and Interception
Attack 2
Defense 2

STRATEGIC BOMBER
Attack 4
Defense 1
Move 6
Cost 12 (Optional: reduced to 10 IPCs)
A Destroyer must be present to hit submarine.
Can make a Strategic Bombing Raid against Industrial Complex.
OPTIONAL: Every time on attack a “1” is rolled, then an enemy’s plane (either Fighter or Bomber) must be taken as casualty.

**Strategic Bombing Raid Escort and Interception
Attack 1

Damage on IC: 1D6+2**

1942.2 FLEET CARRIER
Attack 0
Defense 3
Move 2
Cost 14
Hit: 2 hits
Carry 3 planes (Fighters)
Damaged Carrier can still carry 1 plane.
Carriers are repaired at the beginning of the Power’s turn (Purchase and repair damage phase),
unlike Battleship which are repaired at the end the player’s turn (Placement phase).

ANTI-AIRCRAFT ARTILLERY
Attack 0
Defense 0
Move NCM1
Cost 4
1 hit
Up to 3 preemptive defense @1 against up to 3 planes, whichever the lesser,(as OOB AAA) and
fire regular defense @1 against up to 1 plane on the following combat rounds.
Stop any blitz, but cannot defend itself against enemy’s ground units.

Additional units are added:

For every 2 Fighter units, you can add on the board 1 new Fighter unit.
USSR gets 1 additional Fighter unit. (1 Fg is put in Russia.)
UK gets 2 additional Fighter units. (1 Fg is put on Carrier, 1 Fighter is put in UK.)
USA gets 3 additional Fighter units.  (1 Fg is put on Carrier, 1 Fg is put in Western USA and 1 is put in Eastern USA.)
Optional: You can add an AAA in China instead of a Fighter in Eastern USA.

Germany gets 3 additional Fighter units. (1 Fg is put in Northwestern Europe, 1 Fg is put in Germany, 1 Fg is put in Poland.)
Japan gets 3 additional Fighter units. (2 Fgs are put on each Carriers, and 1 Fg is put in Manchuria.)

@arwaker:

The less different types of units you have in the game, the more of the specific sculpts are in the box.
I dont see the advantage in stategic depth of the game a tactical bomber could offer, to compensate the reduction of specific sculpts and the complification of the rules.

However, one can introduce as many new types of units he wants (as a house rule). What about assault guns, interceptors, frigates or landmines? Would they increase the funfactor of the game? I’m not sure. Same as with tactical bombers.

If there is no Air Base or Naval Base and having only the combined arms: giving +1 to attack if tactical bomber is paired to Fg or Tank, I agree there is not much additional strategic depth about it.
The fun thing is only about having more different sculpts Inside the Box.
From a collectors POV, it seems more interesting having more different units than fewer types but more of them. Isn’t it?
Chips are provided when you have many units of the same type.

Of course, it adds more specific rules. That’s the issue specifically treated by 1941 game.
Simpler and shorter for beginner.

1942 can be more develop with sculpts without extending the play-time or the whole map (not excluding a few changes, like the no-IPC value Islands in Pacific, for instance).
Global is made for hard-core players who have a lot of time.

From what I experimented, I could say that adding Mechanized Infantry and Tactical Bomber (and even a 5 IPCs’ Mechanized Artillery (assault Gun) and 9-10 IPCs Escort Carrier, HBG sculpt) can provides a deeper experience and feel of WWII at a strategic level without having to plan for a 2-days event.

Although, your focus on increasing “strategic depth”, makes we think about the two game mechanics brought to hit directly planes. And in this perspective, one seems better compared to the other.
The one I introduced in my opening post is better because it allows a specific unit (Fighter), a specific capacity: targeting enemy’s plane first (costlier target), while Tactical Bomber also received his specific capacity (being a better hitter on ground targets, but not necessarily on costlier targets).

The other way of creating somekind of dogfight between planes is to allow “1” or “2” rolled by aircrafts to destroy enemy’s.
The mechanic can work but doesn’t seems to increase the strategic depth as much as the former.
Fighter and Tactical have similar abilities, (carrier operation, regular hit, special roll) one have more of this and the other less of that (Fg on “1” or “2” / TcB on “1” only, cannot intercept in SBR).

Do you agree on this last point?

Here is a complete roster with a different Fighter unit (A2 D2 M4 C6) combined with an entirely 3 planes Fleet Carrier for either Fighter or Tactical Bomber units.
Even with a radical change in cost, I think it brings a much better interactions between units and mainly aircrafts from a gameplay perspective than the one I suggested in the opening post and poll of this actual thread.
You should take a look.
Baron Munchhausen’s G40HR Roster for 3 planes carrier & 6 IPCs 1914 Fighter
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35222.msg1370798#msg1370798

@Imperious:

you AARHE reader you. :-D

I am now - I took those from the LHTR 2.0 - but I’ve just seen you’ve done loads of National Advantages for all the countries, so I feel like I’m at a rules buffet now!

Excellent - there are some really good ones in there. I like the Amerika bomber!

Your Italian ones are good - I like how the obvious ones people first think of are the Gustav Line and mountain terrain - it was always a problem for me that it was easy to do in Axis and Allies what it was not easy to do historically - get to Germany through italy.

For Japan I’ve got one new one which is ‘elite naval air’ - I like how in some Pacific wargames the Japanese start with amazing units, which are non replaceable - representing their elite air arm. I use the red A&A Pacific Japanese fighters for these and give them a 4/4 rating. My rule is that fighters that start on carriers are ‘elite’ they are non replaceable.

This rule is linked to the Kamikaze rule in that, once all elite air units have been destoryed - the Japanese may then convert one normal fighter to 2 kamikaze planes - these have no attack value and can only move 2 - but their ability is they work like an AA gun for ships, so it’s basically the AAR national advantage.

But it makes use of the red Japanese planes I have… I use the red infantry to denote those that are ‘dug’ in on islands.

Your Iwoa ships are good - the US did put lots of AA defence on their ships.

Ok - great stuff, and plenty of food for thought!

i like the idea of tanks the 4/4 tanks can be like tigers