Darkest Hour Expansion Pack, and Skonk Works Ruleset

@all-encompassing-goose Please try to adapt it & let me know how it goes! I have it balanced for global interactions, mostly with regards to the British & Russians.

For players who have questions to the Game Mechanisms of the G40 HRE game, we draw attention to the fact that this thread explains what is “Behind the Scenes”.

See the top of the first post in this thread for further information.

We’ll gradually add more Information & Explanations about the remaining Units & Rules in the G40 HRE rulebook.

@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.

@vodot said in [AA50 & AA42.2] Fixed Cost Techs + Tech Expansion:

This is a work in progress, but I’m putting it out here for ideas and feedback if anyone is interested in geeking out on something like this.

This is an expanded list of techs with fixed costs (no more die rolls) that would simply come into effect immediately (unless otherwise specified) for the cost shown. Some of these have a cost of 5 IPCs, with the intention of simply enabling what are essentially house rules/new units (Mechanized Infantry, Cheaper Naval units, rudimentary dogfight rules, etc.) while allowing players with no interest/need for them to ‘opt out’ and save the 5 IPCs. I’ll be using this list for my next solo game and will be making adjustments.

Note: The ‘Turkish Pact’ tech is designed for games where the Turkish Straits begin the game closed (via house rule), but also works for games where the straits start open as per OOB rules (in which case, upon the development of ‘Turkish Pact’ they would cease to be a special case of “Always Open” straits and revert to the normal OOB straits rules (closed to units unfriendly to the controller of Turkey).

Fixed_cost_Tech_v2.xls

SIR, THIS IS PURE GOLD! :)

@knp7765:

I like these new NOs, especially the one for China. So instead of extra cash, they get extra artillery for keeping the Burma Road open. I want to see this one work.

I thought you decided against removing the Japanese planes in Manchuria. Or is this something different?

It has been removed from Halifax core rules, these are my own additions… just wanted to chalange the Axis and if it’s too strong… I’ll put them back.

Ya… we never see China with artilley even if they have the road, this way we will see them more and it’s an additional $2.

@Lozmoid:

I really like the idea of combining South Africa, Australia & New Zeleand, and Canada to form the Commonwealth playable nation. Can anyone please advise me exactly which territories would fall into this faction? […] Am I missing any others? Thank you!

For the answer that I worked out for my own customized version of the game map, have a look at the pictures I posted of my map table here…

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32700.0

…and look for all the territories on which I put a customized blue-white-red roundel (the largest shot of which you’ll see on South West Africa and the Union of South Africa in the picture labeled “7 Europe Right Panel”).

Note that I tinkered with some of the British and ANZAC possessions in the Pacific, which are incorrectly attributed on the OOB map.

About AntiSubWeapon and Mission,
I have a different idea than:

The sub rule we are trying now is 2-1-2 unit as in 1940G OOB but each DD that is declared a sub hunter rolls a die and sinks the sub on a one and locates on a two.
Located or detected subs can then be attacked by CAs or additional DDs.
If sub survives first round of combat then it defends at one or submerges.

When DD are on attack vs Subs, I will let the OOB DD A2 ASW as usual for getting a hit.
If any DD roll “1” or “2” it is a hit, or if roll a"3" then Planes can attack located subs.

If all DDs roll only “4” or higher, then no planes can attack subs, since no DD detected them, however they can still hit any other units in the sea-zone.

I find interesting to let the defending subs to submerge instead of taking defensive roll.
I would rather let this submerge possibility only if all DDs roll “4” or higher.

This will have the effect of drastically reduce the odds to find Subs by 50% instead of an automatic finding. And it gives an increasing importance on having much more than a single DD for ASW.

I will not forbid cruiser from attacking Subs since I already agree to forbid attacking BB vs subs.
It will let cruiser somekind of specific effectiveness vs subs that don’t have BB.

However, Cruiser would not block the subs from submerge, instead of defending.

FYI this project has been scraped and we are moving forward with a 2 phase “historical edition”  its possible that some of the NA’s will be used and developed by members of our group.