PLay test rules mordern axis and allies

@skhande2

I my view, tanks, artillery, and infantry units don’t just represent those things, but rather their units. Most tank, artillery, and infantry units during World War 2 contained some organic AA guns. While there are obviously differences in the size of divisions between the powers (Soviet divisions and corps were smaller than Western ones, one reason they were able to rack up such large numbers), I think a unit represents X number of soldiers, tanks, AA guns, etc. (while actual AA gun units are for dedicated anti-aircraft units which exist semi-independently of other divisions).

I’ve heard suggestions of giving artillery anti-tank capabilities, similar to anti-aircraft artillery in Global 1940 (North Africa’s anti-tank gun piece has something similar too). I think different win rates between different units is mostly represented well (as I hope I’ve somewhat demonstrated above).

@SuperbattleshipYamato

Finished the first game:

2023-8-13-World-War-II-Global-1940-2nd-Edition.tsvg

The game was certainly unique and spiced up from the original rules. It’s quite biased towards the Axis, with the “cannot move into pro-Allied territories while the Soviets and/or the Americans are neutral” is crippling.

I definitely could’ve been more creative as Japan, but overall it was still a fun and unique game.

@Axisarmpit said in [Global 1940] HELP PLEASE Axis and Allies Global Impasse:

Im not blitzing through a territory with infrastructure, but I am entering a territory with infrastructure as part of my non contact move. Lots of gamers agree variations on their understanding of particular rules?

Right. I understood you were not blitzing. I was using that as an example of logic. Please let me explain.

In your explanation of your House Rule you said “…a non combat movement can take the form of an advance into empty enemy territory…”. Your question then is a territory containing infrastructure empty or not? Therefore:

An armor unit may blitz through empty enemy territories An armor unit may not blitz through a territory containing infrastructure Thus a territory containing infrastructure is not empty

Of course it is your House Rule so you can do anything you want but if you want to follow the logic of the game I would say you cannot advance into an enemy territory containing infrastructure during the Non-combat Phase.

Hello Kreuzfeld.

Thanks for the comments and interest.

Here’s what I’ve found in the 6 or 7 games we’ve played so far with this method.

@Aircraft Carriers: Actually, the games we have played so far did not have restrictions on what friendly nations planes could be on what aircraft carrier.  For instance, ANZAC could launch and recover combat move aircraft from a UK or USA carrier.  Carolina made this suggestion and we are going to incorporate it into our “Axis & Allies & Comintern” House Rules the next time we play in early May.  The reasons are the following:

Allies get a little too much of an advantage in the Pacific if they coordinate right.  ANZAC, being basically land-locked if Japan plays right and gets lucky, can just dedicate their IPC’s to pumping out Fighters and TAC’s …. This free’s USA up to just make CV’s and not worry so much about the planes.  …  Limiting CV’s to just being able to launch Combat Moves with their country’s plane balances this

It could also be argued that having carriers launch attacks with their own country’s planes is more historically accurate.  For sure, USA planes were used on UK carriers.  And I wouldn’t be surprised if USA crews even manned some of the planes (that is a TOTAL guess though).  However, most of the time crews trained long hours with the country and navy that they were going to be flying for.  Therefore, the CAG’s were of the same nation as the CV from which they were operating on.

@Casualties:  Any basically “random” method can be used, including all of the one’s you mentioned.  I gave one example and also left it open to other methods that different groups prefer.

@Analysis & Advantage  I fully agree with you.  The GREATEST advantage to this system is for the Allied and Russian players for sure.  In fact, I think it makes for basically balanced game.  The 6 or 7 games we have played so far have had both Axis and Allied/Russian wins.  ….  Here are some additional things we have noticed:

Like you mentioned, Italy/Germany Can Openers are eliminated on the Eastern Front, greatly helping the Russians.  This is SOMEWHAT mitigated by the new rule that doesn’t allow Allied Forces to step on Russian Controlled territories (and vice-versa) to reinforce Russia in the North … But the overall advantage definitely goes to Russia on this one

It is easier for Italy and Germany to combine forces and hold the Med via Gibraltar.  UK –> USA won’t be able to do Can Openers there.  This lets Italy dig into Africa a little bit more.

ANZAC doesn’t get side-showed as easy.  They can pump out subs, destroyers and maybe even the odd cruiser and incorporate them into the UK or USA fleets.  (historically accurate)

I could go on and on … but basically, “It’s a whole new way at looking at the day.”  :-D

There were a few wars fought in South America in the early 30’s. I don’t know who had who’s backing in those conflicts. There was the Guerra del 41 between Equador and Peru. I know the US supported Peru and Japan supported Equador, but I’m pretty sure that support was from the bleachers. The only equipment I can tell you for sure that was used was the Czech LTP (Panzer 38t). These were used by Peru.
Peru had all the gear. They actually prepared for war. This lead to Peru having a 3-4 to 1 advantage in men and equipment. Except for tanks. Equador had none. Peru had around 25. Take a wild guess at who won.

I totally agree.
Timeframe and time lapse between turn makes a better understanding of how units interactions in combat rounds depict in an impressionistic way WWII battles.

If people want to see a houserule set intended to simplify interactions between these units, based partly on Classic Submarine unit here is the start of the opening post. Follow the title-link:

@Baron:

THE ISSUE

According to Dedo (see quote below), and probably other players (I’m thinking about Toblerone77), many new players seem to have issues with rules about defenseless Transports, Submarines immune to aircrafts or not and the various combinations with Destroyer presence or absence.

The learning curve can be hard, particularly when special interactions which deviate from regular rules and principles of this game are involved. Since many months I tried to find different solutions to answer this issue of complex and out of usual interactions. Maybe now this can have a useful purpose.

Wanting to help new players focus more on strategy than bogging on special rules, I would like to introduce six changes to Transport, Destroyer and Submarine combat rules to simplify things.

@Baron:

@dedo:

When following the forums of 1941 and 1942.2, I counted roundabout 20 topics (that is up to 10 percent) with questions concerning submarine or transport rules in both of the forums. It seems that for new players especially these rulebook parts are difficult to understand. Wouldn’t it be appropriate to pin down these rules in general parlance and to make them sticky in the forums? Honor to the members, who has already answered the more or less countless questions concerning these topics, but in my opinion we should put an end to this and stop to reinvent the wheel by giving a clearer wording to these mechanics of the game obviously difficult to understand. What do you think?

For my part, I revised these TPs and Subs rules to make interactions simpler between Subs, Destroyers, planes and TPs for tabletop games.
Your comments make me thinks about an alternate rules set which can be provided in addition to the OOB rules. New players can use it as a simpler intermediary or introductory step.

@Der:

@toblerone77:

Many of the newer OOB rules since revised in fact do not help the game for the more casual player and stretch the game out to the point where; if you can actually find a gamer willing to give it a go, you must use HRs in many cases to get them even close to playing the game again.

I absolutely agree! I think this subject - of general simplicity in Axis And Allies - is worthy of its own thread, so I will start one.

So, following this line of thinking to help introduce new players to a less complex naval combat interaction, I suggest this changes and tweak to simplify things and improve the impressionistic WWII depiction of Submarine warfare and Anti-Sub air cover and patrol to protect Transports and Convoys.

The second post of this thread is a transcription of OOB 1942.2 rules with corresponding changes suggested in this opening post. So, you can print them and see where these changes take place in the rulebook.

LIST of SIX small changes to help make unit interactions more consistent from a beginner POV:

Transport is treated as any other surface vessel when allocating casualty: each elligible transport unit worth 1 hit and can be chosen according to owner’s choice, whether before or after a combat unit has been selected as casualty.
OPTIONAL variant: Still worth 1 hit and Transports are taken as last casualties.

One or more friendly Transport units, sharing the same SZ, get a single defense die roll value of 1 per combat round.

Submarine cannot block unescorted Transport from amphibious landing.
Submarine and Transport cannot control SZ and can ignore each other in combat or noncombat move.

Submarine cannot hit, or be hit by, another submarine.

Destroyer does not block Submarine’s Surprise Strike.

But plane does not need Destroyer presence to hit unsubmerged Submarine.

IMPACTS of these changes:

No more defenseless Transport: TP get a combat value and can be taken as casualty the same way as other units.
Taken last can be an optional variant which is nearer OOB rule.

No combat value changes for Submarines or aircrafts with/without friendly or enemy Destroyer presence.
Aircrafts act the same as Cruiser, Carrier, Battleship when making attack or defense rolls against Submarines, except Subs still cannot hit aircrafts.

Since Submarine cannot harm enemy Sub, no fleet padding can rely solely on this cheapest unit.
Destroyer remains a must against Submarine and because Destroyer can hit aircrafts.

Submarine iconic Surprise Strike full capacity is counterbalanced by Transport illegibility as casualty and Sub inability to stop amphibious assault from lonely TPs.

WARSHIPS & TRANSPORT
Legend on unit capacities:
Unit type        Cost
Combat values
Special abilities

Submarine    6 IPCs
Attack 2 first strike*
Defense 1 first strike*
Move 2
Surprise strike: *Permanent first strike Attack 2 and Defense 1 against all surface vessels only, including Destroyers.
Submerge (instead of firing in Surprise strike phase)
Stealth Move
Unsubmerged Submarine unit can be hit by planes without any Destroyer (or Anti-Sub Vessel) presence.
Cannot hit planes nor submarines.
Cannot control SZ and can be ignored by other warship and Transport units.

Destroyer    8 IPCs
Attack 2
Defense 2
Move 2
Anti-Sub Vessel: One Destroyer unit blocks all Submarine’s Submerge and Stealth move.
Does not block Submarine’s Surprise Strike.

Transport    7 IPCs
Attack 0
Defense 1* per TPs group
Hit value: 1 Worth 1 hit and can be chosen as casualty anytime, same as warships.
Move 2
*Special Convoy Escort Defense: One single defense @1, each combat round for all friendly transports sharing SZ.
Cannot control SZ and can be ignored by other warship units.
Non-escorted Transport can make amphibious landing in Submarines infested SZ, (same rule as OOB first edition)
so Transport can ignore Submarine during Combat and Non-Combat phases, same as warships.

OPTIONAL Variant: Taken as last casualty, once all other illegible units has been chosen as casualty.

QUESTIONS:

Question 1: Do you believe that such units values can be simpler (less exemptional rules) and be used instead of OOB rules to make some baby steps toward a full OOB rules implementation?

Question 2: Is it still somewhat balanced in itself?

Question 3: Do you think that this 1 hit Transport with a small combat value is an easier rule to grasp for beginner?

Question 4: Do you think these six changes really improve WWII depiction of Submarine warfare and Anti-Sub air patrol to protect Transports and Convoys?

The new map is an uneasy compromise, with some tts values reflecting oil wealth, others not.

Personally I prefer adding industrial base and mineral resources together to create a single economic index, but the separate oil values have been tried:

http://www.basesproduced.com/aaa.html

The big problem is that the Allies always have more than enough oil, the Axis hardly ever enough.  Forcing the Axis to take oil centres to keep going makes their moves very predictable.