Various house rule pieces ( and where to find them)

@armedace
Those are some pretty cool ideas, I’ve thought about incorporating marines and how to do so-your ideas seem good. I also like the idea of interceptors at 2, more realistic and makes you think about SBR more. Although I’m not so sure about reducing air bases costs and increasing their ability to scramble to nearby land-seems OP.

Just some thoughts on how I might implement a TSRR rule in our Global game. I feel this may help out in the bidding process. If Russia can get it’s troops back to Moscow, the Allies may not need such a high bid.

A -The Trans-Siberian Railroad was made to bring mass troops from all over Russia. Therefore, ALL troops gathered along the Trans-Siberian Railroad countries may move freely from one end to the end on Russia’s NON-COMBAT move. This move may only go ONE WAY OR THE OTHER! There was only one rail and it took 8 days from end to the other. This railway may ONLY be used by Russian troops. The route exists along Russia to Samara, Samara to Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk to Tunguska, Tunguska to Yenisey, Yenisey to Yakut SSR, SSR to Buryatia, Buryatia to Amur.

B - Exceptions: If Axis controls any country of The Trans-Siberian Railroad, it is then sabotaged and no longer functions until Allies liberates. It then can be used on its FOLLOWING non-combat move.

C - The Trans Siberian Railroad may bombed by Tac/Strat Bombers the same as Naval and Air Bases. (See Rule Book)

@MasterMark26 Glad I could share the ideas !

For the trucks, I 3D-printed some models on Shapeways and added them to my collection after painting them. Here is the link to the model in my shop :

https://www.shapeways.com/product/RK9QJAH6V/wwi-truck-x12?optionId=128058468&li=shop-inventory

You can see the end result on the Plastic Commando’s YT channel once he painted them (and he did a great job) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADQnU6f0gKQ

There’s other options like gun-mounted trucks, which could be a hybrid mobile-artillery / AA battery, armored cars, and more ! So if you want to make things more interesting, feel free to be creative !

For your tank idea, I wonder if the increased cost would make them appealing. They sure would boost your offensive power by boosting your infantry, it’s just a question of would you be able to buy enough to make a difference. Let me know how it turns out !

Happy gaming, good sir !

@SouthsideCH:

It seems every time we play there are certain things we just don’t understand. While we understand the rules sometimes they just do not seem rational.

Does anyone have house rules addressing the following?

Artillery supporting infantry during an amphibious assault.

If I move a sub or a destroyer-less navy into a convoy sea zone, forcing the enemy to submerge, why can they convoy me?

It does not make much sense that scramblers are defenders, especially in some cases involving tac bombers.

I get that Kamikaze attacks have to choose their target. But if I bring in 3 cruisers, 2 battleships and a carrier and they choose to hit the battleships, shouldn’t the cruisers get to bombard? They can’t take part in the defense against the Kamikaze.

Convoy Disruption seems easy. There are no ill effects to the disruptor. If you can intercept when facilities are being attacked it makes sense a navy in that sea zone should be able to do the same.

I would love to hear some input on these as well as any house rules ideas.

In terms of house rules, are you looking for balance or realism?

I always argue realism before balance so.

1:No, Artillery should not be able to support infantry during sea invasion, that’s why battleships should be used.

2:I argue they should. The sea territory is vase and submarines are loved during WWII because they are a pain to track down, they are basically the naval sniper.

3: I am not sure the exact issue. Fighters and Tacts can be used offensively and scramble protects your navy. I personally think all allied aircraft should scramble regardless of what nations navy is being attack as long as the nations allows it.

4: Kamikaze wings traditionally went after Battleships and Aircraft Carriers first because taking those out would give the IJN fairness as the IJN had a lot of smaller ships. I personally think Kamikaze wings should also be allowed to target transports.

5: So what’s the issue with Convoy Raids then? It makes you force yourself to deal with an enemy navy.

@UltimateChaos:

Yea you are correct. I guess POWs would never really work in this game because unlike real war it does not matter how many men you lose

I’m not convinced the idea couldn’t work, only that the current idea of it wouldn’t work.

How about a situation where, for every 3-5 infantry you kill, you gain a PoW that can be placed anywhere. PoWs need to be protected from liberation and every PoW in a province over it’s IPC value costs you 1 IPC/turn in support.

Results:
You don’t muck with the balance around attack/counter attack and amphibious assaults.
You’ve got incentive to distribute the PoWs you capture and risk their liberation, rather than stock them in your capital.
The Axis, generally considered the stronger side, will take brunt of the downsides since they are killing large numbers of Russian and Chinese infantry. Might actually balance the game.

@knp, 3D6 heavies have never been popular. Back in the early nineties we played off and on with them. It’s one of those things where if you have them, you love them if you don’t, well life is hell. I like the 2D6 and seems like most players can live with them especially on the Global scale and sheer number of units on the board.

Personally I liked it better when SBR came out of the player’s bank. People really hate that one and democracy usually rules most of the time when you have a regular group. I understand why people hated that one, however I liked it. It’s one of the things I like about disrupting convoys.

Honestly I love HBG, you can now add a lot of stuff to the game especially when it comes to tech. SPA and TDs are a must.

Anyway your thoughts on mech blitzing and both dice counting for heavies was spot on.

Our 1939 World at war heavy bombers rules.

HB = special units.
Only UK and USA may produce HB. (Avro Lancaster & B29)

Germany may produce HB as tech. dev.

Cost = 18
Att = 4 (two dice for each industrial bombing attack).
Def = 2
Move = 8

What taste better, an apple or an orange?
Depends on the person.

Like Cmdr Jennifer said:
@Cmdr:

The destroyer in my mind is the submarine of old with the ability to defend itself against air attack in place of the sneak shot ability.

In my mind, the submarine is the new piece on the board.  Here’s a cheap unit you can toss out for naval attacks and it helps keep your opponent honest.

The sub is a new type of unit, which acts differently than in any other A&A games.

Sure, there are some things we miss about it - but now subs can move about without getting hit by aircraft!

This is awesome!  :-D

A side note: sub stalling is not a problem any more. (A&A Pacific)

Think of subs as a different unit, with new strategies to come up with.

Think of subs as an attackers unit.    :-)

One example, after the US fleet has moved away from sz56 (West coast), subs can be mobilized in sz56 and catch up with the main fleet with out needing AC/ftr protection from Japan’s aircraft.