Lets Talk PT Boats

Well for me, heavy infantry means Panzergrenadier, SS division & Russian shock army.

cost = 4
att = 1 (attack at 2 in the first round of combat)
def = 2 (defend at 3 in the first round fo combat)
move = 1

@allboxcars:

I’d add the rule that before using the piece, the owner must first loudly declare “I’m going commando!” to activate it.

Commando attacks get +1 bonus for each opposing player who does a “spit take” in reacting to the announcement.

lol
In my play group it’s understood that someone is always going commando  :-D

if neutrals are building infantry and such, then we go back to who gets to decide that?  if they are neutral they we can’t say the other side, because both sides are the other side.  if we give neutrals a standing army, and a military growth chart that sets how they grow each round or so, but deciding what Spain or Saudi Arabia could build is gonna be a big argument in game by the two sides and really isn’t going to be worth playing with, unless we made all the neutrals a standing 7th player and let them work together the whole game, but that’s so far from history…

–if we give neutrals a standing army, then to declare war I would think shouldn’t need to cost anything, as they have to fight enemy troops and there is a cost to that. 
–if we don’t give them a standing army, then yes, there should be a cost to declaring war, whether in dice, or that they have to move the number of units equal to the value of the territory in, or that the other side gets to roll equal number of dice to the value of the territory, then divide in half, round up to take the economic toll.  in some way should be a cost, beyond the classic 3IPC cost.
–if it is just diplomatic, then the cost of the dice work for that.

We have introduced Oil rule la couple of years ago.
In our 1939 game rules, Axis players doesn’t have oil so they have to fight to get some because they’re going to face a penalty after the 7th round.

If you conquer a neutral oil territory you receive form the bank, twice of the value of the territory.
Ex: Saudi Arabia = 2 IPC so you’ll receive 4 IPC.
When you invade an ennemy oil territory, the player must give you twice of the value of the territory. Ex: Egypt = 2 so UK player must pay 4 IPC.

With the above post in mind, I propose the following for both Escort Carriers AND Naval Fighters.  Also, with Naval fighters being slightly weaker than their land-based counterparts, I propose that the regular aircraft carrier’s IPC cost be slightly tweaked.

Regular Aircraft Carrier

1    Attack
2    Defense
2    Movement points
11    IPC cost (Cost is lowered to 10 IPCs with the Advanced Shipyard technology.)
–    May  hold up to 2 naval fighters.

Escort Carrier

1    Attack
1    Defense
2    Movement points
7    IPC cost (Cost is lowered to 6 IPCs with the Advanced Shipyard technology.)
-    May only hold up to 1 naval fighter.

Naval Fighter

2    Attack (May be upgraded to 3 Attack with the Jet Fighter technology.)
3    Defense
3    Movement points (May be upgraded to 5 movement points with the Long Range technology.)
8    IPC cost (Cost is lowered to 7 IPCs with the Advanced Shipyard technology.)
–    Only naval fighters may operate from carriers, but naval fighters MAY be used on land.

Regular Aircraft Carrier + 2  naval fighters

5    Combined attack value
8    Combined defense value
3    hits
27  IPC cost
–    Up to 2 naval fighters may be on the regular cv.

Escort Carrier + 1 naval fighter

3    Combined attack value
4    Combined defense value
2    hits
15  IPC cost
–    Up to 2 naval fighters may be on the regular cv.

These stats seem to fit a little better into the naval chart.

kinda takes you back, doesn’t it?

@Bardoly:

0   Defense - This unit can stop tanks from blitzing the same as an aa gun can.

thats kind of a crazy rule, i dont c the point in it or the historical backing.

Otherwise my main concern is that i dont think these rules add a lot of stratagy except making three of each players land armies super strong.

Why cant you have naval or air commanders?

@Variable:

I’ll go ahead and add my version of the Paratrooper Rule:

Cost 4, Att 1, Def 1. Delivery method: Your choice, whatever you like best. LH rule is good (bomber drops one into first hostile zone), or many of the others here are great as well.

Here’s the kicker: Special ability- Match either 1-1 or 1-2 (haven’t play tested enough yet to decide) with DEFENDER’S UNITS, reducing the defender unit by 1 Def.

Example: 1 tank and 1 paratrooper attack 1 infantry and 1 tank. Attackers = 1@3 (tank) and 1@1 (para). Defenders = 1@2 (inf) and 1@2 (tank) instead of 1@3 (tank). If you decide to match 1-2, then defender would be 1@1 (inf) and 1@2 (tank)

Thoughts?

After going back over this a few times, I’ve decided on 1-2 matching. First, the delivery method is a bit complex and expensive. 2, with bases having their own air defense now there is more tactical AA fire on the board. 3, at a 1/1/1/4 unit, they need 2 “points” more to be worth it. So match 'em 1-2 if you use my rules.