Best posts made by baron Münchhausen

@SS-GEN said in Global War 1940 2nd ed.:

@baron-Münchhausen

Yes we will test it. I made the final decision.
Why not. Both Ships were doing simultaneous A and D so 2 dice make sense.

So let me know how the playtest go.
No need to change too much at a time
This double dice capacity boost Cruiser and BB but they don’t get the versatility of aircraft.
And historically these units were good against air and sea. So assuming numbers are quite balanced, the main question is about this double dice procedure. Is it playable or confusing? Is it slowing the pace or keeping the game flow?

IMO, this has precedence over other historical accuracy matter.

@barnee said in Global War 1940 2nd ed.:

@SS-GEN
yea my thinking was if you were concerned with excessive air casualties in the air battle phase you could do something such as, Hit= Die, Miss= Live go onto regular battle and Neutral/No Decision w/e you wanna call it, = doesn’t take place in regular battle but doesn’t Die.

This is represented in regular battle when units miss, but if too many planes either survive or Die in air battle, this would allow another mechanism to regulate the combat.

It could be looked at as a no decision with planes running out of fuel and returning to base after dogfighting or battle damage sustained requiring the same. Not all planes that sustained battle damage were destroyed and not all that did were prevented from completing their mission and engaging in their main, in this case, regular combat either.

Anyway, it may be too tactical for a strategic level game, but thought it could provide an option if air battle casualties were to impactful. So Hit = Die, Miss= Continue, No Result = RTB or Return to Base.

I do follow along here but not 100%, baron can be a little wordy at times : ), so maybe this is already allowed for.

I would love to someday dial your game in for triplea.

Rock On Guys :)

Hi Barney,
long time, no see.
All because of a lady… :)
Do you know if it is a complex matter to translate the D6 mechanics from Triple A into a D12?
Does someone in the Triple A worked out something about Global into a D12 game?

What is the difference between Miss and No Result in your suggestion?
I don’t see the nuance you want to implement.

@SS-GEN
I like that warship are @3 AA, Fg @2 AA and TcB @1.
Easy to remember.

With two dice it is almost same odds than 1 dice, treating “2” or less as hit on aircraft and higher scored hits treated as usual.

Now the question is whether or not the two dice mechanic is giving a good pace and a nice flavor to your game.

I’m ok with your numbers, mostly 8.33%, 16,7% or 25% is keeping things in check with minimal values.

Assuming this for your next game, what can be your AAgun values and mechanic?

@baron-Münchhausen

I reviewed the 2 hits Battleship values to 2.5 multiplier factor.
It is an approximation but this is easier to use this value if you need to assess between two naval fleet during a live game with no AACalc allowed.

It is based on the very even (almost 50%-50% survival equilibrium ) combat between 1 Destroyer @2 and 1 Cruiser @3 against 1 Battleship, 2 hits @4.
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=1&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=&dBom=&dTra=&dSub=&dDes=1&dCru=1&dCar=&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat-Tra&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=

1 Destroyer @2 and 1 Cruiser @3
5 pips * 2 hits = 10 pips*hits

1 Battleship, 2 hits @4.
4 pips * 1 BB worth 2.5 hits = 10 pips*hits

@MGregersen

Hi, I played and tested a few things on AA50 1941 and 1942 2nd Ed.
One issue with cheaper warships and aircrafts is that Allies can build up at a faster rate than Axis.
Increasing the number of initial units on the setup were to compensate for the initial lost to help Axis stay ahead in the first game rounds.

If you want to give a try without tweaking setup, then assign Axis to the best players.
And play with the house rules.

Another issue with smaller games compared to G40, is the StB A0 C5 lack of offensive capacities in regular combat.
Lowering aircraft attack/defense in addition, then Axis lack of initial punch becomes obvious.

At least, for each StBomber you should provide an additional TcBomber (and 2 per Axis Strat bombers) for purpose of regular combat support.
So, it mitigates the impact of aircraft with less punch in first rounds, on Axis side.

If you need an altered setup for G40, I might find one already written (in my personnal notes) to fit into the above requirements.

Take care everyones,

Baron

@barnee said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):

Am thinking about adding an option for Air/Naval bases. Airfield would only be able to scramble 3 if no damage. 1 damage can scramble 2 and 2 damage only 1.

Naval base can repair unlimited ships if no damage. Only 2 ships if 1 damage and 1 ship if 2 damage.

Might encourage bombing them more. Idk

Sounds an interesting way to emphasized the importance of keeping facilities undamaged and fully operational.

You are the wizard of the code. You are probably one amongst the few which can do such into Triple A.

I’m expecting more free time soon.

Hope to have a real time to toy with your development.

@mAIOR said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):

@baron-Münchhausen Yeah… 1 Might be enough. It depends. It depends on the size of each individual unit. It might be better to give more AA dice to Battleships and carriers since these ships usually had quite a decent AAA complement.

Yeah, I think I will playtest these changes as well. Writting a small piece of software so I can make this easy as possible.

Is there a kind of calculator like this already made? it would save me the trouble.

What kind of calculator are you looking for? For which purpose?
In Triple A, once the unit combat values are set right, there is a working Battlecalculator.

Otherwise, to set a roster of combat units strength value based on attack/defense power compared to cost, there is a different Excel file.

You are right about how it depends on how we set the narrative about units interactions and “number of individuals” represented by a unique sculpt.

There is many different ways. Which can either be influenced by the tactical scale of combat (a single sortie of StB wings, for instance) or rather the strategic level of theatre of operations (a two to three months long of constant carpet bombing).

For instance, in Subwarfare developed around Destroyer A1 D1 M2 Cost 5 into Triple A Redesigned HR, Submarines always fire a Surprise strike each combat round even if a Destroyer is present.

One way to read this into a logical narrative is to figure it is up to a 3 months campaign and Subs are the best at taking a Surprise shot at any warships crossing their crossfire’s scope.

However, the Triple A mechanic was done so each TcB and DD gets 1 roll @1 prior to Subs surprise strike to act like active AntiSubmarine patrol both air and sea. If missed, means Subs has passed through the net. And only time DD get their opportunity to fire at them is after Subs revealed themselves through a Surprise attack of torpedos. However, if DD or TcB get a hit during this AS Patrol, it is like a AA gun. Subs are not able to roll at all. It is like they were caught off gard at surface and DD or TcB depth charge and sink them.

If you see where I’m going.

@mAIOR

Hi, IDK if you read all available threads on Convoy HR.

This one was a kind of spin-off of Redesigned (at one time), you may scroll and read to get a glimpse of questions, issues and options around creating a Convoy raiding mechanics.
My own HR on that topic was mainly developed for 1942.2 and AA50 Ed.
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/25268/convoy-disruption-for-1942-2-g40-submarine-economic-warfare/130

It worked quite well with Submarine as the only unit able to raid on these smaller scale map. G40 is rather a different beast.

HTH,
Baron

@mAIOR
I see where you are going. Redesigned developed a Strategic bomber with no combat capacity at 5 IPCs, D6 damage and works quite well, based on various playtest. Tactical bomber replaced it as the actual combat unit, but with a lesser range 4+1 instead of 6+1 with Air Base.

It can be possible to imagine Subs A0 D0 Cost 5 or 4 with special damage on Convoy.
What can replace Subs? IJN Subs were not much assigned to sink civilian cargos. US Navy ships were prioritized by Subs, for their demise.
What kind of naval battle do you see in Atlantic? What will replace combat active units, traditionally U-boats were a major part in it?

@mAIOR said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):

@barnee said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):

right on. I kinda got the abstract thing it was the other that threw me. How’s the playtest going ?

Early days. I hope to get the brunt of it done over the weekend with proper 10k rolls and stuff like that. So far it feels good.

Submarines seem to be useful for hit and run tactics if they can escape. I ended up choosing for naval scale, BBs represent 2 ships and CVs represent either 4 light carriers or two fleet carriers (so that the air wing size of 100 planes makes sense).

I am redoing OOB in my spare time for the game as well so we have a more accurate force composition to the situation in 1940.

Oh and I think only Japanese and American carriers will be able to load 2 air wings at the start too. British and German carriers had quite smaller air wings (but had armoured decks so maybe an extra hitpoint?).

IMO, you should enlarge your scale:
1 Fighter: Escort or Light Carrier
2 Fighters: UK’s Carrier
3 Fighters: US or IJN Carriers

Yes there is at least one thread talking about different way of scaling Carriers.
Here is how I see the scaling in combat power:

a) 1 hit, 1 aircraft (this one is usually around 9 or 10 IPCs) I prefer 9 (scale of 3 IPCs)
b) 1 hit, 2 aircraft (may use a 12 IPCs range, like it is in OOB 1941)
c) 1 hit, 3 aircraft (maybe at 15 IPCs, it would be correctly incremented)
d) 2 hits, 2 aircraft OOB G40 at 16 IPCs
e) 2 hits, 3 aircraft at 20 IPCs (because it is well rounded, lol)

Now, it is up to you to decide for A/D capacity.
We have seen:
A0 D1, 1 hit
A1 D1, 1 hit
A0 D2, 2 hits
A1 D2, 1 hit (1941 and 1942)
A1 D2, 2 hits (1942 Redesigned version actually tested on WW2, V5 TripleA map)
A1 D3, 2 hits My own houserule with Fg A2 D2 on board.
A1 vs D3 was needed to help a Full Carrier being better at defense than offense because my Fighter type is even offense/defense.

Giving a minimal attack factor to Carrier help makes all warships equal because with “0” you get a special capacity rule: like it was a defenseless Transport but is not, may it enter a Sub infested zone with escort or not, etc.

@baron-Münchhausen said in Convoy Disruption for 1942.2 & G40 Submarine economic warfare:

It is a punitive mechanics, as OOB G40 instead of a bonus mechanics develop previously on this actual thread.
It is yet to be play-test to see if this can be balanced somehow.

This new sequence with modified SZs is inspired by the quoted post.

Now, I can provide a revised for Redesigned National Convoy Disruption House rule for 1942.2.
First thing, the Convoy SZ is to be identify with Power’s Convoy Marker on map.
All Convoy SZs worth 3 IPCs and are bordering at least 1 TT or have an island group in it. These TTs can worth 0 IPC to many IPCs, this doesn’t change the 3 IPCs Convoy SZ basis.

Here is 1942.2 modified map (for more action into Pacific Theatre) Convoy SZs I would implement (some such as SZs 2, 3, 34, 45, 53, 57 can be considered as Allied lend-lease shipping SZs coming from either UK or US toward Russia or Australia) :

Soviet Union 25 IPCs
3 SZs x 3 IPCs = 9 IPCs max.
SZ 4 (Karelia and Archangel)
SZ 34 (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Persia),
SZ 63 (Soviet Far East)

United Kingdom 40 IPCs
10-12 SZs x 3 IPCs = 30-36 IPCs max.
SZ 2 (Greenland)
SZs 3 (Iceland), 7 (Northern UK), 8 (Southern UK),
SZs 10 (Eastern Canada), 13 (Gibraltar), 23 (West Africa),
35 (India), 40 (New Zealand), 45 (North Eastern Australia)
If captured by Allies: 37 (East Indies), 44 (Solomon Islands).

United States 50 IPCs
9 SZs x 3 IPCs = 27 IPCs max.
SZs 2 (Greenland), 11 (US East Coast), 18 (Caribbean), 22 (Brazil),
SZs 53 (Hawaii), 55 (Mexico West Coast), 56 (US West Coast),
SZs 57 (Midway), 65 (Alaska/Western Canada)

Germany 45 IPCs
2 SZs x 3 IPCs = 6 IPCs max.
SZ 5 (Baltic)
SZ 15 (Italy)

Japan 35 IPCs
6 SZs x 3 IPCs = 18 IPCs max.
SZs 36 (Malaya), 47 (Borneo),
SZs 48 (Philippines), 60 (Japan), 61 (Costal China), 62 (Korea)

An important thing to note :
lf at least 1 territory bordering (or the Island group within) the Convoy SZ is taken from his original owner and the Convoy SZ belong to the same owner, then this Convoy SZ is deactivated and can no longer be raided by enemy’s of the original Convoy SZ owner’s which have his control marker in this Convoy SZ.

When such Convoy SZ is deactivated, simply place a Nation Control Marker from enemy power onto it.

Only Submarine can raid Convoy SZ.

During Phase 1 of a Power’s turn, renamed : Convoy disruption and damage repair on IC and 2 hits units.

Each enemy’s Submarine present in a Convoy SZ of the Power’s turn makes a Convoy raid (Convoy Disruption).
Even if there is warships (including Destroyers) in Convoy SZ, Submarine can still make such raid. Once the raid is done, Submarines stay in raided SZ.

Each Submarine can make up to 3 IPCs damage, by rolling 1D6 divided by 2: 1-2 = 1, 3-4 = 2, 5-6 IPCs = 3 IPC damage.
So a single Sub always does at least 2 IPCs damage on average.

There is no defense roll and Destroyer cannot do anything about it.
It is up to the Convoy SZ owner’s to send Destroyers (and more) during his turn to retaliate and sink Subs in combat phase.

Damage are immediately remove from Convoy owner’s hands, never more than 3 IPCs per SZ.
*Exception: when there is two Convoy markers (Greenland SZ 2).
Such a raid is still up to 3 IPCs per Power’s turn, but can reach up to 6 IPCs, when UK’s and US’s damage are summed up. *

Below, you get the picture of a modified 1942.2 map marked with these SZs.

@Argothair
Hi Argo,
I really like all these Allies NOs with “…no Axis warship in xyz SZ.”

It is a way to simulate U-boats impact on Allies trade and merchants ships war goods delivery.

All Ukraine was wheat basket.
Any way to add Eastern Ukraine into the NO mix?

I hope your Triple A playtest is going according to plan.

Just a 2 cents idea:

GERMANY

• Scandinavian Iron – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of: Norway, Finland, and NW Europe
• Eurasian Wheat – 5 IPCs if Axis control 3+ of: Karelia, Ukraine, EASTERN UKRAINE or BELORUSSIA
• Archangel-Astrakhan Line – 5 IPCs if Axis control ALL 3 of: Archangel, CAUCASUS, and Kazakh

Second one is easier, third is tougher to get.

Might be also:

• Archangel-Astrakhan Line – 5 IPCs if Axis control 3+ of: Archangel, BELORUSSIA, CAUCASUS, and Kazakh

@Argothair

Maybe I feel it wrong because both 2nd and 3rd objectives are not clearly historical nor tactically working objectives.
During war, there was 3 Army groups with different and sometimes competitive aims.

To illustrate my point (trying to keep the 2+),

GERMANY

• Scandinavian Iron – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of: Norway, Finland, and NW Europe
• Eurasian Wheat – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of: EASTERN UKRAINE, BELORUSSIA, CAUCASUS
• Northern shortcut of Seaports – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of: Karelia, Archangel, Belorussia
• Archangel-Astrakhan Line – 5 IPCs if Axis control 2+ of: Archangel, Eastern Ukraine and Kazakh

That way, USSR might have different ways to shut these NOs, mainly through control of Belorussia or Eastern Ukraine.

I feel it worth a try to add Bulgaria/Romania to Softbelly. Ploesti oilfield were vital for Third Reich War effort.

@Navalland said in 1942.2 All ships cost 2 ipcs less:

If fighter and bomber remain the same then destroyer cost should absolutely not be decreased. Cruiser could be either 10 or 11, but 10 ipc could make battleship very bad unit.

I totally agree.

I suggested this scale in a quote below:
Subs, DDs and Carriers are already interesting buy at their OOB cost.

Transports 5 ipcs
Subs 6 ipcs
destroyers 8 ipcs
Cruisers 10 ipcs
Carriers 14 ipcs
Battleships 18 ipcs

@Der:

“Going too far is as bad as not going far enough.” - Chinese proverb

What motivates you to make a house rule?

1. Desire for Historical accuracy - I read history books and see something glaringly inaccurate in the current rules and think “Oh we should change that.”
2. Boredom - after several sessions the game can become stale and repetitive to me. (Probably faster than for others, I admit.) I think - “Oh, this would add some spice, let’s put that in.”

There is another reason, you should add, it is about OOB rules that you feel broken somehow.

Both of your popular threads:
The aberration of the defenseless transport
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30618.msg1108069#msg1108069

Reality wrecking destroyer rules need a revamp…
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34169.msg1314701#msg1314701

were adressing real issues about units interactions and don’t seem to fit into the 2 main motivations quoted above.
And it generates many interesting possibilities for HRs.

@Der:

@Zombie69:

If you make destroyers work against subs only on a 1:1 basis, you’ll have to increase sub cost to 8 IPCs or they’ll be grossely overpowered. It’s already tough defending against subs when you need to spend 8 IPCs for every 6 IPCs spent by your opponent. If every sub that isn’t matched also gets to make a first strike, then it gets ridiculously overpowered for the guy buying subs. Either that, or bring their attack down to 1 (but I don’t think that would be enough).

Another good point - but then the question is - historically - did it cost Britain more to stop the subs with all the DDs, planes, sonar, etc. than it did Germany to make them and send them out?
As I understand it the British were pretty tied up with the Battle of the Atlantic and used a lot of their resources there. They were not able to land in Norway or Europe  successfully until 1944, and that was with the USA helping.

Perhaps the US could be allowed to give Britain destroyers to help. Historically they gave them 50 DDs.

One way of doing this is to allow a US DD to become a UK’s, once reaching UK’SZ.

@Ritterkrieg said in [Global 1940] How to make cruisers and battleships work?:

@superbattleshipyamato Great assessment.

Currently, the rules for all versions don’t incentivize Cruiser purchases.
A simple specialization might change this. Make Cruisers the equivalent of land-based AAA units. That is, a one-shot, pre-battle, aircraft defensive roll of 1 to hit aircraft only. Same rules as AAA. 1 unit=3 max. rolls.

Only usable while the Defender.

Thoughts?

Troy

Hi everyone!
It’s been a while since I had focused on A&A.

On my next occasion,
I intend to use a combined arms for my 12 IPCs Cruiser Moving 3(4), and AA platform.
Same rule as an AAA (up to 3@1) for both offense and defense. Need to be paired 1:1 to either Carrier or Battleship to be activate.

Do you see any issue about attacking Cruiser with AA capacities when paired with 1 capital ship?

Also, for 20 IPCs Battleship Moving 2(3), I intend to tweak the shore bombardment to be 2@4, if at least 2 units are landing.
In addition, a naval combat would nullify only 1 roll @4.
Exception, if the Battleship was damaged in the previous naval battle, she cannot perform any shore bombardment.
Do you think it might be enough to help them be part of the naval purchase?

For M3 Cruiser, I also intend to provide +1M for 1 Transport or 1 Destroyer when paired 1:1 with.
So, at a Naval Base, 1 Cruiser & 1 Destroyer can move up to 4 SZs together. Same for 1 Transport with 1 Cruiser.

That way, pairing Cruiser with small or capital warships, will bring interesting tactical options, don’t you think?

@vodot said in [1942 2nd ] Submarine/Air Unit rule actually a drawback?:

@general-6-stars said in [1942 2nd ] Submarine/Air Unit rule actually a drawback?:

What do you mean by they will always be hit last ? Subs ?

I mean that under my proposed rule change subs would always be hit last by any aircraft that could hit them. Subs could only be assigned hits from enemy aircraft if there were no surface ships eligible to receive those hits.

Going back to the 1DD + 2FTR attacking 1BB + 6SS example, the defending subs could still be hit by the attacking aircraft - but only after the BB has been sunk (and providing the DD has survived that long).

Currently per RAW, subs can soak aircraft hits as long as there’s also an enemy destroyer present (the gist of the original complaint from @Megatron). The attacker in the above example is forced to sub-hunt first (because of A&A’s defender-chosen Order-of-Loss (OOL) rules) - while the ignored BB shoots his sub-hunting planes out of the sky. If the attacker leaves his DD behind, this combat is suddenly correct - the fighters duel with the BB and ignore the subs.

To rephrase the OP again, there shouldn’t be a case where an attacker is de-incentivized from bringing DDs into combat with subs out of fear that their DDs will enable the enemy’s subs to “leap out of the waves” (as @aardvarkpepper put it) to absorb hits from their attacking aircraft!

My rule change represents what I think is a best of both worlds with one simple change - let the subs be hit by aircraft+DD groups while preventing them from soaking the damage from the aerial portion of a large combined air/naval battle.

Making it based on OOL (order of loss) works well, I think, because OOL is not really relevant in the one situation where an a/c+DD group would WANT to hit subs - when sub-hunting/clearing sub groups. OOL isn’t important if subs are the only defending units!

Does that make sense?

At attacker that brings a DD + planes into a SZ with only enemy subs probably wants to sub hunt. That’s the RAI; he should be able to do that just like the OOB rules. However, an attacker bringing a DD + planes into a SZ with subs and a bunch of surface warships is definitely not sub-hunting - he is attacking a surface fleet! Sure, once he wipes out the fleet he will want to hunt the subs too; but that’s the correct OOL: he will want to hit the surface ships first. We shouldn’t penalize him for buying the DD by forcing every attack that contains a DD+A/C to sub-hunt before attacking the surface fleet.

Hi Vodot,
you got it right. A few months earlier, I got the same issue on a DK’s treads.

A few houserules can provide for keeping Destroyer as seafodder, even with C8 higher relative cost to Subs at 6 IPCs.
In addition to

1. Subs must be taken last amongst naval units,
2. Subs cannot hit Subs should be implemented.
   That way, a fleet buffer against Subs only attacks, can no more be Subs only and need Destroyers on defense to take damage for Capital ships and Cruisers and to allow aircrafts (on carriers) some hitting capacity against these attacking Subs.

I agree 8 IPCs is high for naval fodder, but in a game with higher economy like G40, it remains reasonable and yet more pieces make for a longer game. So, in 1942.2, 8 IPCs can be useful to keep in check pieces junkies who wants more units on board and aiming at a 12 hours game.

Hi guys,

I wonder if any gameboard players have invented something about all these territories with no economic value.

Here is one, feel free to add up yours below:

When such Territory or Island is captured, give the new owner a one time 1 IPC bonus.
Theme: National pride & morale improvement.

If such territory or island is exchanged between Powers, the 1 IPC bonus work both sides.

It still worth zero IPC when calculating income.

What do you think?
Can this minimal bonus might changed balance or just make an incentive for more action?

@shadowhawk

I read somewhere that the reason why it was 3 preemptive roll @1 is because other land units defend @2. So, rolling each round contrive the owner to keep a lesser roll @1/6 and to take casualty on @2/6 which is a hard choice involving risk on losing a better odds in hope of a more harmful hit on a costlier unit.

By rolling at the outskirt of battle, you already know if this AAA unit got a hit or not. This smooth the order of losses while choosing casualty.

Up to 3 rolls is another way to tell that this AAA unit was able to remain on board 3 rounds before being taken as a probable losses.
Not bad considering it is a 1/6 odds unit.
In many battle, third round can be poking hole into Artillery/MI or Tank stack.