1942.2 : case for Zero IPC Territory

@bakerbei

Haven’t played 42 hardly at all. His other mods, 41 and 39, especially 41, seem very balanced. I think if you haven’t played it much, I’d just roll with no bid for starters.

@SMichael23 Its not a solution if you magically give Italy this territory. If you want to model a problem, first get the facts straight with some research, then go into balancing it.

Aside from 1 ipc and 1 infantry, just increase Italy +1 and balance out the additional forces for both sides…

China is a road apple and a basket case. Japan needs to get thru that mess asap or they have no chance… If you hold back an already weak Japan in 42.2 you create a KJF scenario in every game.

Add italy fine, leave china alone and move the German air force out of UKR, give a bomber to Russia. Minor tweeks, then playtest

mostly good ideas, i would add axis minor allies with substitutions

@simon98v said in [1942 2nd ed.] Suggestion for a setup change:

Russia: Add a bomber to Karelia, remove the factory there
UK: Add 2 infantry to India
US: Remove 1 transport from sz 11, but make US gain a full turn of non-combat moves
This will help the US preserve some of its starting fleet, save some of the troops in China, make Russia a little stronger vs Germany and help the UK hold India for longer. Thoughts?

It totally imbalanced toward allies… If you play OOB ( not LHGC version) this would track toward allied advantage. To balance you start with LHGC, and move existing units around for both sides, not just add 20 IPC to allies.

I like all the special sea zone restrictions. Gibraltar and Danish straights. Any thoughts on Suez going through Egypt.

Also like the inclusion of aaafire and some limited transportation capability. Anything that makes for more attractive ship builds always seems good to me.
:-D

On the air, the main impediment to ready testing FtF is the requirement to buy more stuff than comes in the boxed game. With a G40 expansion you still only have 3 sculpts.

I was thinking about this issue for the C5 strategic bomber concept in 1942.2.

One thought I had about Tacs in 1942.2 for the Defenseless Strat B idea I had, was that some aircraft might be represented on the map by a scult that always has a green chip under it (saving all green chips for this use). So with that idea, I was thinking you could represent 3 air units with only 2 sculpts. For example

Strat B = C5 SBR only
Green Chip Fighter = Tactical Bomber
Fighter (red or gray chip) = Fighter

Or you could use a roundel, or paint a tail, but the green chip seemed pretty easy to work with.
Fighter can still fit on a deck that way.

Perhaps if its a game designed to use G40 sculpts for 1942.2 you could just do the same thing with the bomber sculpts? Like
Medium bomber = normal sculpt
Strat bomber = green chip sculpt.

Just an idea to make it easy to test, without a big commitment in painting or purchasing new stuff.

For the factories, I do worry that it takes any series threat to Tokyo from the Americans pretty much off the table. It’s very hard to get onto the mainland in an effective way with US, without expanding production on the money islands. Is this what you are trying to avoid? Or are you trying to prevent Japan from using one on India/Africa/Australia?

For my part I enjoy the factory unit, so rules that restrict where it can go aren’t as appealing to me. Basically the 3 islands affected, Philippines, East Indies and especially Borneo, are pretty much the only interesting territories in whole the Pacific, by virtue of their production potential, so it seems a shame to lose them.

Here is a different way of playing with Fighters.
The Carrier combat value as been change to keep balance amongst themselves: attacking against defending Full Carrier.
Hope you will enjoy.
Let me know if you ever play-test it.

@Baron:

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

Do or die?  :-D haha

I guess it’d be rather like Classic then, where you had to save to invade neutrals, except in this case you’d be saving ipcs to have the option to retreat! Might be fun. I could see a way that might be worked in if the players were agreeable.

As for the standard bonus, depending on which board you wanted to try it on, the influx of cash can definitely make purchasing strategy more interesting out of the second round and on. I’ve tried it on Revised, 41, 42.2, AA50 etc as my most basic cash bonus and people seem to enjoy it. Makes the land grab and combats just that much more intense, since you always have the bonus buck in the back of your mind

@Baron:

Do you think this last HR makes Carriers too much vulnerable against Subs if they put 1 Fg and 1 TcB on board?

Does this cutting in half the defensive power of Carriers against Subs should be balance by a no restriction against Subs for Tactical Bombers?

TcB A3-4D4M4C10 can hit Subs anytime by themselves. No need of Destroyers.

But StB units (any number) can only hit submarine units when paired to at least 1 destroyer unit.

Who knows? Some ideas to judge this situation?

Don’t you think it could help simplify the Rules on the subs vs aircrafts?

Because, there is only StBs needing DDs on offence which can be part of any naval combat with Subs ?

Actually, this line of thinking pushed me further away.

Once fighters can no more hit any Subs, I thought why not simply allows both TcB and StB to hit subs without the need of destroyers.
But, at the same time, keeping all the actual stuff on DD and subs.
That would meant that any type of bombers attacking subs only in a given SZ should not be able to do any harm to them since subs keep their Surprise phase and can submerge prior to the regular combat phase. In other terms, DDs will still be needed on many circumstances to get a chance to hit subs.

So with Fg unable to hit them and the Subs submerge still very efficient, giving Bombers the ability to hit subs will not doom them.

That’s how I see things, am I under a false impression?
Do you think it is playable?
Because, it could be much simpler to play subs vs planes than the actual OOB.
Hope you can leave a comment.
Thanks.

Seems to me like the introduction of China/ANZAC in 1942 would just give Japan free money once they take Australia, since they can’t buy an IC until turn 3 (making 7 IPC per turn) and with no other way to spend money, would just end up with 21 IPC in bank as a gift to Japan for taking Australia.