Transports are still units.
There are often exceptions to normal rules, and are handled as much as possible in the rules when foreseen. One example of said exceptions are Industrial Complexes. These have no offensive, defensive or movement capabilities, yet they do have impact as a unit: You can not tank blitz thru a territory with an IC.
Seems to me like an unintended oversight in the rules about w/d from a sea force comprised of just transports.
@Krieghund said in AA50 : Retreat From Enemy Transport:
@PAGAN Then this is more a discussion about what the rule should be than about what the rule is. :wink:
I can understand the logic leading to what you would like the rule to be, and in fact actually having the rule be that way was discussed during development. However, it was decided that the rule should be in line with the rule that you can’t retreat from nothing once you’ve won the battle. Since the transports are defenseless and would be automatically destroyed if the battle continued, retreating from only transports would be equivalent to retreating from nothing.
I see your point, but you aren’t really retreating from nothing, because SOMETHING from the attacking force has to remain when all that is left is transports to be destroyed. In other words, if a bomber were to attack a destroyer and 3 transports, and both the bomber and the destroyer were to hit, the only remaining units in this battle would be the transports. They are not automatically destroyed since there are no remaining attackers to kill them. This implies that there is something there to be destroyed (e.g. the transports), because if there was nothing left to be destroyed, why would you still need something attacking to survive to kill nothing!
I know, now were getting all existential!
@PAGAN
I agree with you regarding trying to write a rule (n this case, when you can retreat) for every possible outcome, but this autokill on transports (on a unit that has no defensive capabilities other than being the last survivor), falls through the cracks.
Back the the OP question. If transports are the only remaining units from a sea battle, and the defender wants to retreat, why not? They are choosing to do so in lieu of being able to kill the transports. It should be an all or nothing proposition. For example, I have 3 ftrs left, 4 transports remain. I will go one more round of attacking, hoping to roll 3 hits, leaving 1 transport and then I can w/d. Baloney. You either stay and kill them all, or you can w/d and leave them all alive. This would be how I would allow a w/d of the attacking units.
And, as you point out Pagan, it’s our own personal invention. Try to make it a fair one when you create one.
@Krieghund said in AA50 : Retreat From Enemy Transport:
Per the rules, only attacking units may retreat, and all of them may normally do so*. This means that all attacking units (being able to retreat) qualify, but defending units (being unable to retreat) may qualify only on the basis of being able to fire at a valid target. So, if all of the attacking units have been destroyed, or all of the defending units that can fire at a valid target have been destroyed, or both sets of units have been destroyed, the combat is over and the attacker no longer has the option of retreating.
An interesting view of this condition also indicates that submerged subs (if they were to be the only defending units) would not allow attacking air units (if just air remains in the attacking force) to retreat as well, since the subs are not in the list of “all defending units that can fire at a valid target have been destroyed”
@vodot said in axis_roll vs. Argothair (AA50 Balanced Mod playtest):
I confess, looking at those two maps back-to-back I mostly thought to myself “man, @axis_roll is good at Axis and Allies.”
AA50 is my game of choice :)
+1 for side-swappage.
That will probably be next game, when I am the allies
Also, @Argothair/someone, can you remind me where that SA factory came from? Was that a bid or UK1 buy?
The UK IC in South Africa was a UK turn 1 buy.
@Topmat said in Repairing a Battleship?:
@Soviet-Steamroller I know what you mean. Having a huge fleet and then losing to a few subs is very depressing.
Having subs (low cost) in your own fleet can shield your carriers. Just have at least one DD in that mix so attacking subs don’t get the opening fire capability.
@Argothair said in axis_roll vs. Argothair (AA50 Balanced Mod playtest):
Germany took the unusual step of building a Mediterranean aircraft carrier, which has created a variety of interesting threats in the Atlantic and given Russia a bit of breathing room.
Hmm. Let me know how Russia’s breathing room is after this German turn
:dark_sunglasses: :muscle:
So that those following along, the IPCs per side at the end of round 2 is
Axis: 121 (1 was saved)
Allies: 102
I guess one could add 6 to the allied total since the Chinese will most likely be getting 2 infantry next round.
The game is just getting interesting
@Panther said in axis_roll vs. Argothair (AA50 Balanced Mod playtest):
@Argothair
Back in those days of ABattleMap :smile:
What do these things have in common?
battlemap, axis_roll’s computer, Original A&A 50th Edition & axis_roll for that matter!
They’re all old, but still are functional!
That’s how us old gamers roll, Panther :)
I forgot one more question. The black sea is open, correct?
The Dardenelles is not closed. True?
@Argothair said in Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]:
Oh, and @axis_roll? Start when you like! It’s Germany’s turn; you have my email. :-)
Wanted to run these by another member of our playing group first, just to ensure there is nothing too glaring (besides the Axis opportunities I see :dark_sunglasses: )
Then the Blitzkrieg will begin!
@vodot said in Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]:
@Argothair @axis_roll you guys are gonna post the game to a thread, right? 0.o
What Argothair and I have done in the past was exchange emails with combat moves, used the A&A dice roll calculator to conduct battles (this emails roll results to players), then email/exchange battlemap files representing a countries end of turn position. We used/exchanged a spreadsheet for IPC tracking as well.
Not sure how we’ll do it going for this game. Argothair?
@Argothair said in Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]:
In my personal vocabulary, I consistently use the following definitions:
“Ship” includes TT, SS, DD, CA, CV, BB.
“Warship” includes only SS, DD, CA, CV, BB.That said, for this variant’s NOs it is not very important to distinguish between different kinds of ships, so if you want to just say that the list is always “warship” for simplicity, that’s fine with me.
Therefor we can replace any reference to ‘ship’ with ‘warship’. Basically, transports don’t count
I guess this means subs are a little more important since they do have the capability to negate several National Objectives: Every Russian, 2 Japanese, 3 UK, 1 Italian and 1 American
I’m happy to play either side! I cut the cake, so you get to pick your slice. :-)
OK, as my moniker implies, axis_roll !
So I will take the bad guys…
I have a mild preference for low luck and no tech allowed so that we can more quickly arrive at a sense of where the game is unbalanced, but I certainly don’t insist on it. We can use a slightly tweaked version of your rules for low luck bombing, too – just add +1 to the damage table.
Yes, we’ll need to agree on that chart. I believe it was
Chicago Rules
1D6 = Damage
1 = 1
2,3 = 2
4,5 = 3
6 = 4
This game
1D6 = Damage
1 = 2
2,3 = 3
4,5 = 4
6 = 5
what (if any) is the difference between a warship and a ship? There’s several references to both in these.
So @Argothair, this is the list we’re using to game play test?
GERMANY
Scandinavian Iron – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of: Norway, Finland, and NW Europe
Eurasian Wheat – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of: Karelia, Ukraine, Caucasus
Archangel-Astrakhan Line – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of: Archangel, Moscow, and Kazakh
RUSSIA
Northern Lend-Lease – 3 IPCs after the start of turn 3 if Allies control Archangel with no Axis ships in SZ 3 or 4
Southern Lend-Lease – 3 IPCs after the start of turn 3 if Allies control Persia & Caucasus w/ no Axis ships in SZ 34
Eastern Lend-Lease – 3 IPCs after the start of turn 3 if Allies control SFE & Yakutsk w/ no Axis ships in SZ 63
JAPAN
Chinese Coastline – 3 IPCs if Axis control Manchuria, Kiangsu, Fukien, Kwantung, and French Indochina
Chinese Hegemony – 3 IPCs if Axis control literally all Chinese territories
Bornese Oil – 3 IPCs if Axis control Borneo and no Allied warships anywhere in SZ 49, 50, 60, 61, or 62
Javanese Rubber – 3 IPCs if Axis control East Indies and no Allied warships anywhere in SZ 38, 49, 50, 60, 61, or 62
Central Pacific Islands – 3 IPCs if Axis control 4+ of Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Midway, Wake, Carolines, Hawaii
Co-Prosperity Sphere – 3 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of India, Australia, Hawaii, Yakut SSR
UK
North Atlantic – 3 IPCs if Allies control E. Canada, Greenland, and Iceland with no Axis ships in SZs 1 through 9.
Mediterranean Route – 3 IPCs if Allies control Gibraltar and Egypt with no Axis warships in SZ 13, 14, or 15.
Soft Underbelly – 3 IPCs if UK has at least one land unit in Italy and/or the Balkans.
Indian Empire – 3 IPCs if Allies control India, Madagascar, and South Africa with no Axis ships in SZs 28 through 35.
ANZAC – 3 IPCs if Allies control Australia, New Zealand, New Guinea, and the Solomon Islands.
ITALY
Vichy Collaboration – 3 IPCs if Axis control France, Morocco, and Libya
Mare Nostrum – 3 IPCs if there are no Allied ships in SZ 13, 14, or 15
Abyssinian Adventure – 3 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of Sudan, Italian East Africa, Rhodesia
Mideastern Oil – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of Egypt, Trans-Jordan, Persia, Caucasus
USA
Arsenal of Democracy – 5 IPCs after the start of turn 3 if Allies control Western US, Central US, and Eastern US
Manifest Destiny – 5 IPCs after the start of turn 3 if Allies control Mexico, Panama, Hawaii, and Alaska
South Atlantic – 2 IPCs if Allies control West Indies and Brazil with no Axis warships in SZ 10, 11, 12, 17, 18, or 19
Operation Torch – 3 IPCs if USA has land units in both Morocco and Libya
Operation Overlord – 5 IPCs if USA has land units both NW Europe and France
Central Pacific Islands – 3 IPCs if Allies control 4+ of Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Midway, Wake, Carolines, Hawaii
Alcor Aluminum – 2 IPCs if Allies control Australia, Solomon Islands, Hawaii, and Western US
MacArthur was a Donkey – 5 IPCs if Allies control the Philippines
West Pacific Airstrips – 5 IPCs if Allies control 3+ of Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Formosa, Manchuria, Buryatia
CHINA
Burma Road – +1 Chinese artillery for any Chinese-owned territory if Allies control India, Burma, and Yunnan
** Setup Change – Sikang starts the game with 1 infantry, 1 fighter. Yunnan starts with (only) 2 infantry.
** Rules Change – Chinese troops may move into Burma, French Indochina, and/or Kwangtung.
(Plus the interceptor mod you suggested, no tech)
If so, do you have a side you prefer to play? I will go with either one. One last question… Low Luck or pure luck for battle outcome?
Once we decide these, then I can start to strategize more seriously and then we can arrange a date to start.
@Argothair said in Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]:
The only new rule I would want to add is Global 40 Balanced Mod-style strategic bombing and interceptors. I would boost the strategic damage of bombers from 1d6 to 1d6+1, and say that they can be intercepted by defending fighters. Each defending fighter rolls one die one time and shoots down an attacking plane on a roll of 2 or less. Then, each attacking bomber and each escorting attacking fighter rolls one die one time and shoots down an intercepting plane on a roll of 1 or less. Then, all surviving fighters from both sides automatically retreat (or land in place), and you continue on with AAA fire and bombing damage as normal (except that bombing damage is slightly increased to 1d6+1).
Not familiar with this particular mod, so couple of questions:
Do defending ftrs have to intercept? In other words, they can decide to not go up to avoid the risk of being lost.
Does the AAA flak only shoot at remaining bombers, not fighters?
Strategies to win with the Allies: Kill Germany First (KGF).
Bomb the Germans with USA, UK invasion force (with some USA support)
Russia holds, expands as western allies open new front.
Japan can help Germany hold on by back door pressure on Africa (take UK money) Japanese ftrs landing in Europe to help defend key territories.
Summarizing… if playing to win, games will go mostly along these lines. Of course, the allies can always TRY to get cute and go after Japan, but that is VERY HARD, especially against a good Jap player, mainly because there is no true monetary reward for USA when confronting the IJN.
@DoManMacgee said in 1940 vs anniversary balance:
However, far more work has gone into developing G40 into its current state than has gone into AA50. AA50 is balanced by the community simply by adding bids for the Allies (varying by scenario and whether you play with NOs turned on/off).
The ‘community’ may have gone the route of bids, but our Chicago players group has developed a whole set of house rules akin to the AARe (Enhanced) rules for AAR (revised).
In order to not hijack this thread any further, PM me if interested in getting a copy of the “Chicago Rules” for AA50-41. These rules are 8+ years in the making.
@vodot said in [Various] The Colonial Outpost (an enhanced Allied IC bid):
Not going to lie I really want to see if this makes a Russian
Bearing StraitSea of Okhotsk navy a thing.
ONLY if somehow an USA fleet sails to the Sea of Okhostk first, then Russia adds 2 ships to that navy.
Keep dreaming though…
@CWO-Marc said in [Various] The Colonial Outpost (an enhanced Allied IC bid):
In one sense, this is all just a picky point of terminology, so it can easily be discounted.
Sure, the name can be changed, it’s merely a tag on the free IC concept.
@CWO-Marc said in [Various] The Colonial Outpost (an enhanced Allied IC bid):
But I’m wondering if a two-birds-with-one-stone solution might be to tweak the concept slightly – maybe by specifying in more detail which power can make this change to which territories, and maybe even by splitting the concept into slight variants with slightly different names, depending on which of the scenario types I’ve described above are (and are not) being envisioned.
Why do that now? Try it out as laid out, see what may need to be reigned in if it seems too strong. Tweaking of a house rule is best accomplished by game play testing.
