IDK, what is your general intent but allowing AAA an attack factor makes it for a smaller AAgun with more mobility than usual OOB designed to figure for an hardpoint with lot of AA defense.
I would look into decreasing cost and combat value to increase the affordability and popularity.
Something like (12-sided dice) A1 D1 C3 against up to two aircraft first but allowing a minimal defense @1 against regular unit if no enemy’s plane.
I have been keeping a attentive eye on this project. After taking a good look at the map, I wanted to provide some feedback The quality of your work is exceedingly impressive! I am currently shopping around for a printer to bring this to reality. Thanks for all the countless hours you spent on this project and for supporting this community in such a tangible way.
Thumbs up.
Plus 1 to you, Tjoek.
OOB AAA is used to make Sea Lion possible without giving UK to much useful land combat unit.
With AAA you can give more hits without actually giving offense or defense roll (as usual unit) when you have less planes attacking per AAA *3 planes.
@SS:
Baron. We do allow 1:1 fig dest if just subs attacking a fleet.
So if you have Battleship. Cruiser and a Destroyer being attacked by 5 subs the defender can scramble only 1 fig from an airbase only for just the one defending Destroyer.
Seems consistent since you have a 1:1 Destroyer blocking Surprise strike.
It provides a way to tweak balance of Subs vs other fleet.
Subs in your game are much able to withstand their own compared to 3G40 Sub and sequence where they don’t have much opportunity at first strike.
Forbidding scramble is a way to help giving more offensive punch to Subs, mostly around ATO.
I read only DH Mosquitos was fast and so reliable to outrun fighter and give no time for Flak to ignitiate a counter.
Besides, I’m anxious to read your story about the last 13 hours game.
@SS:
@Baron:
AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane
D@1 at ea H Bomb, Tac & Dive Bomb
M1
C5I know there is a lot of details and exception in your game.
Maybe to be simpler for memory and emphasize the value of heavy bombers, I’m inclined to restrict AA@D1 to Hvy B only.
TacB were not able of such high altitude bombing.
AAA are going to be more efficient for 5 IPCs against TcB and N Dive-bomber too:AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane (Med B, TcB&DB, Fg&NFg)
D@1 at each Heavy Bomber
M1
C5And this also emphasize the usefulness of Fighter to intercept Heavy bombers.
Unless you got balance issues about it in previous games?
No balance issues. I agree I will just give H Bomber AAA D@1 only. I believe I had it for what I read history wise was it was hard for AAA gun to shoot down a Tac bomber due to its dive angle.
Just a case about Stuka and Sturmovik:
Rudel, the legendary Stuka pilot and unrepentant Nazi who flew the Ju-87G, claimed to have destroyed 519 Soviet tanks. But Rudel was also shot down or forced to land 32 times, which pointed to the Stuka�s major weakness. With fixed landing gear and a level speed of less than 250 miles per hour, it was very vulnerable to defending fighters and flak.
Sterrett rates the Sturmovik as the best close support aircraft of the war. It was certainly the most expendable. Some 20,000 were destroyed. Facing elite German fighter aces and thick German flak defenses, and flown by inexperienced crews, they took staggering losses, especially in the early years of the war.�During the spring and summer of 1942, one Il-2 was lost for every 24 combat sorties, and in the Battle of Stalingrad the ratio increased to one aircraft per 10-to-12 combat sorties,� notes the Guards Units book. Perhaps that is why there is a story, likely apocryphal, that some Sturmovik rear gunners were prisoners drafted into special penal battalions.
In the opening stages of the Battle of Britain, Stukas performed very well against shipping over the Channel but less so over land, where fighter opposition grew. There were some successful attacks against airfields, ships, and “Chain Home” radar stations, but during just 10 days in August, The Stukas lost 20% of their total strength. The plane’s low speed made escorting it difficult on the way to the target and its low altitude after dropping bombs was an even greater problem (the Stuka proved very vulnerable to ground fire at that point). After August 19, the Stukas were moved to the Calais area to concentrate against shipping, which they continued to do until being withdrawn late in the year to refit for operations in the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe.
@SS:
Well there was 17 techs in game and still didnt unbalance game. It would of been nice to finish out game but have a new game Saturday morning. Axis has 27 points with losing back Manila (1 point )and Cairo (1 point). That would of been 29 points and with the Mideast Oil fields control (1 point) giving them 30 would of won the game. These last 2 games were the best so far. I hope Saturdays game turns out just as good. But have more players now and some will need to learn some of the changes to game.
It is very promising for the next game.
I’m really happy you got such a satisfying experience with your newly develop unit profiles and House rules.
Tac Bomber : Cannot land on Carriers.
A7 Can pick target with a return shot. Ground only.
A7 Roll of 3 or less can pick target with return shot. Naval only.
A3 against surfaced subs only. No return shot.
D5 Can pick target with a return shot. Ground only .
D5 Roll of 3 or less can pick target. Naval only.
M5
C11
Dog Fight @1 Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
SBR 1d8 damage (Air - Naval ports, Train Stations and Oil Derricks)
SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 4 or less
AA Gun D@1 against ea Tac BombNaval Dive Bomber : Can land on Carriers and ground.
A7 Roll 3 or less can pick target with a return shot. Ground and Naval.
A3 against surfaced subs only. No return shot
D5 Roll of 3 or less pick target with a return shot. Ground and Naval.
M4
C10
Dog Fight @1 Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
SBR 1d8 damage ( Air - Naval ports, Oil Derricks)
SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 4 or less
AA Gun D@1 against ea Dive BombNaval Fighter : Can land anywhere.
A5
D7
M4
C10
Dog Fight @3 Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
AA Gun D@2 against ea N. Fig
Cannot hit surfaced subs.Fighter
A6
D7
M5
C11
Dog Fight@3 Every 1st round of combat only if enemy planes.
AA Gun D@2 against ea Fig
Cannot hit surfaced subs.
To also keep the same repeating special @3 number, I would also place TcB and NDB special attack on AAgun at same odds:
SBR Kills AA gun on a roll of 3 or less
So, Fg and TcB are going to be parallels: Fg in dogfight, TcB & NDB against AAgun.
What do you think?
Any balance issues foreseeable or encountered?
AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane
D@1 at ea H Bomb, Tac & Dive Bomb
M1
C5
I know there is a lot of details and exception in your game.
Maybe to be simpler for memory and emphasize the value of heavy bombers, I’m inclined to restrict AA@D1 to Hvy B only.
TacB were not able of such high altitude bombing.
AAA are going to be more efficient for 5 IPCs against TcB and N Dive-bomber too:
AA Gun
A0
D@2 at each plane (Med B, TcB&DB, Fg&NFg)
D@1 at each Heavy Bomber
M1
C5
And this also emphasize the usefulness of Fighter to intercept Heavy bombers.
Unless you got balance issues about it in previous games?
@SS:
US lost most of there fleet getting back Manilla a few turns ago and now with mostly US Pacific buys has helped FEC and China put some pressure on Japan in Saigon area. The US got the Tech Super Subs A6 D3 C7 and had 8 subs with fleet but decided to keep them on the surface for fodder in the big naval battle for Manilla. Would of been nice to see if them subs would of gotten in on some sneak attacks. Ill call them Labrador Packs. With the M6 AB figs are deadly from any Capital defense and going out aways to attack or defend.
With Naval planes only M4 and can only land on Carriers in game, now Japan cant just have a walk in the park. There still deadly with there planes if you position them right.
It seems introducing land-based M5-6 aircraft is also a way to keep IJN overwhelming airfleet M4-5 carrier-based aircraft restraint and balance.
Carrier-based are still allowed to land on AB right?
Subs are best on offence role, probably not the best tactics but, if you don’t have enough DDs, you can use Subs for fodder. But opponent will be happy that A6 be underused as D3.
Yet, US Subs were the most efficient weapon groups of all WWII:
Employing boats of the Gato, Balao, and Tench classes, American submariners scored the most complete victory of any force in any theater of war. Having advanced considerably in design, technology, and reliability during the 1930s, the submarine was ready to become a very flexible weapon in the war against Japan. Each of these Fleet boats displaced roughly 1,500 tons, and carried a complement of 7 officers and 70 men. Four diesel engines provided surface propulsion at speeds up to 20 knots and charged the batteries that powered the electric motors for submerged operations. […]
Despite a slow beginning because of the Pearl Harbor attack and the nagging problem of defective torpedoes, the Submarine Force destroyed 1,314 enemy ships in the Pacific, representing fifty-five percent of all enemy ships lost and a total of 5.3 million tons of shipping. Out of 16,000 U.S. submariners, the force lost 375 officers and 3,131 enlisted men in 52 submarines, and although this was a tragic loss, it was still the lowest casualty rate of any combatant submarine service on either side in the 1939-1945 conflict.
In the final months of the war, American submarines had difficulty finding targets, because the Japanese had virtually no ships left to sink. In response, U.S. boats employed newly-developed FM sonar sets to navigate through minefields in closely-guarded Japanese home waters to seek out the remaining targets. On 27 May 1945, a nine-submarine wolfpack led by CDR E.T. Hydeman on board USS Tinosa (SS-283) left Guam under orders from VADM Lockwood for the first major penetration of the Sea of Japan. After picking up the survivors of a downed B-29 en route, the pack traversed the Tsushima Strait on 5-6 June and once on station, set up their own shooting gallery. In 11 days, they destroyed 27 merchant ships with total tonnage exceeding 57,000. In the end, Japanese ships had no safe haven. There was nowhere to hide. The American submariner’s silent victory was complete.
Among the U.S. Navy’s deadliest and arguably its most effective weapons were its submarines. The unrestricted submarine warfare during the Second World War in the Pacific knew no bounds, no limits concerning the sinking of Japanese ships. Shrouded in secrecy, the “Silent Service” depended on stealth for its success and resourcefulness to counter Japanese countermeasures.
Postwar records compiled by the Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee indicate Japan lost 686 warships of 500 gross tons (GRT) or larger, 2,346 merchantmen, and a total of 10.5 million GRT to submarines during 1,600 war patrols. Only 1.6 percent of the total U.S. naval manpower was responsible for America’s success on its Pacific high seas; more than half of the tonnage sunk was credited to U.S. submarines. The tremendous accomplishments of American submarines were achieved at the expense of 52 subs with 374 officers and 3,131 enlisted volunteers lost during combat against Japan; Japan lost 128 submarines during the Second World War in Pacific waters. American casualty counts represent 16 percent of the U.S. operational submarine officer corps and 13 percent of its enlisted force.
[…]
Despite the initial faults of America’s submarine force, there was optimism. For example, between 1941 and 1945, U.S. Navy codebreakers deciphered Japanese sailing dates, courses, speeds, and routes of naval convoys and formations, unbeknownst to the Japanese. This information was supplied to the U.S. submarine force, which would lie silently in wait for unsuspecting ships. By 1943, 22 Japanese warships and 296 merchant ships would be sent to the bottom, due to workable torpedoes and changed underwater tactics.
Increased submarine proficiency, founded on an all-volunteer service (submariners made fifty percent extra pay), new long-range fleet type models, and the successes of the U.S. Navy codebreakers, by August 1944, found the “Silent Service” inflicting prohibitive losses on the Emperor’s merchant marine, scoring key successes against Japanese warships that insured victory in the Battle of the Philippine Sea, and a blockade of the home islands that was strangling the Japanese economy.[…] The situation for Lockwood and America’s submariners was slowly improving by late 1942: U.S. subs in 1942 sank 180 Japanese ships for a total of 725,000 GRT; yet Hitler’s U-boats sank 1,160 Allied ships of more than 6 million GRT.
[…] The German strategy of “wolfpacking” was adopted. It called for coordinating submarine attack groups during 1943. More submarines, of larger size and firepower, were being built in American shipyards. New torpedo designs added the necessary punch for U.S. subs to eventually penetrate the once forbidden Sea of Japan. By year’s end, American sub improvements had netted a total of 1.5 million GRT sunk. Eighty-six American subs had also rescued 380 downed aviators from Pacific waters.
American submarines flexed their naval might following the recapture of Guam in July-August 1944. U.S. subs based on Guam and Saipan imposed a virtual blockade against Japan. Few ships entered or left Japanese waters without being attacked or sunk by submarines. Japan ran out of oil for her naval armada, gasoline for aircraft and tanks, steel and aluminum for industry, and food for her people. […]
https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/npswapa/extContent/wapa/guides/offensive/sec6.htm
The U. S. submarine service started the war with 111 boats, added 203, and lost 52 (50 of them in the Pacific). Of the 16,000 submariners who sailed on war patrols, 3,506 did not return- a casualty rate of 22 percent, the highest of all arms in the American services during the war. Nevertheless, the U. S. submarine campaign in World War II was the only campaign of its type in the history of naval warfare that can be rated a complete success. The submarines played a decisive role in the war by incapacitating the Japanese Empire�s economy. Of the 7.8 million tons of Japanese merchant shipping lost between 1941 and 1945, nearly two-thirds (4.8 million tons) was sunk by U. S submarines, which were also responsible for one-third of the Japanese warship losses. The U. S. Submarine Operational History, however, conceded that scholars would do well to �ponder the fact that Japanese anti-submarine defenses were not the best. If our submarines had been confronted with Allied anti-submarine measures, the casualty list of the submarine force would have been much larger and the accomplishment of Allied submarines much less impressive�
https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2016/01/01/usn-submarine-campaign-against-japanese-shipping-1941-1945/
During the war the U-boats sank about 2,779 ships for a total of 14.1 million tons GRT. This figure is roughly 70% of all allied shipping losses in all theatres of the war and to all hostile action. The most successful year was 1942 when over 6 million tons of shipping were sunk in the Atlantic.
My bet would be on purchasing more infantry to not loose Panther too early and let T-34 being destroyed against German Infantry counter.
Use aircraft with Infantry to conquer deadzoned TT due to Soviet counter and place most of Tank together with 2 or 3 Infantry buffer to deter any attack, let Soviet loosing momentum, by G3 or G4, he will fall back being unable to sustain 1:1 attrition with Germany.
@SS:
Got some more turns in game. Germany ready to take Stalingrad and Italy taking back Cairo in 2 turns maybe giving the Axis 29 points soon. There at 26 right know. UK landed in Norway. Even though UK sacrificed a lot there it made Germany retreat its major pieces back to Norway with there planes giving Russia a extra turn buy. They are holding there own. Will see if Germany taking Stalingrad will cost them on Russias counter if they have enough. With the Air Base ( Fig- Tac M6 ) in Moscow it makes Italy and Germany to bring Navy support with there transports other wise the figs can hit in Turkey sz or Leningrad sz.
As you can see as in war the convoy axis raiding has slowed do to time to get Russia.Japan has been being hit hard for the first time in the Pacific. US trying to get close enough to do a landing. Japan figs on Toyko with the M of 6 for figs have countered any US landing in Soviet far East. Fec will not lose Calcutta and some movement now finally in islands. With that 2nd IC in India has helped Fec hold Calcutta and now being able to buy some navy and hopefully get some pressure on Italy as soon as possible.
Interesting for Soviet to get more options with Land-based TcB or Fg, the additional 1 IPC worth it for them, Soviet get no use of naval aircraft. Also, TcB are much more accurate against German’s Artillery or Tank which is pretty depicting how Soviet Shturmovik Ill-2, were kind of air tanks on German’s lines.
Japan can cover more SZs, making US escorting vessel mandatory to land in Soviet Far East.
You have so many distance on your map that M5-6 is not a luxury.
I might add that on your map, these two types of aircraft make for a more complex planing strategy to use them at maximum effectiveness.
2 ICs for FEC seems working.
What exactly means FEC?
@SS:
After 8 turns there is 10 techs out there in game so far. This is normal. US got there NA Fast Carriers M3 at start of turn and this works good with the Cruisers M3 for faster support towards Japan. More Cruisers are being bought in the Pacific for US and Japan.
US also got Super Subs Tech 2 turns ago so now the Subs A6 D3 and are being bought for Japan navy attacks coming soon with fleet so planes cant hit them except Tac-N Dive B.The sub cant hit sub rule is sweet. Subs were passing each other in the Atlantic. US even got a sub in the Med for 2 turns to force Italy to buy a destroyer on a turn because all they had were transports and a Battleship. No figs in Rome to scramble. Italy Tac bomber missed the US sub 3 times !
So far it doesnt seem like the new piece values are favoring anybody or anything in game so far.
There seems to be more smaller naval battles in the both sides of theater do to the Cruiser M3, Tac-Dive hitting Subs, Naval Fig-Dive B only M4 from anywhere, Subs not being able to hit Subs, and the Fig-Tac M5-6AB.Will see what happens. Looks like a allies victory if US can get to the Philliphines with Anzac support.
It seems to be very promising and to be actually interesting to have so many more options because of units abilities. It is very appropriate to get many smaller battles in many SZs. I rather prefer this.
Now, US fast Carrier can work tandem with Cruiser. Pretty useful when front line is far away along asian coastal SZ.
Land vs carrier based aircraft seems to be working pretty well.
TacB cannot always hit on marks against Subs in offense when patrolling SZ, increasing survivability and creating the annoying effect of needing to protect surface vessels against them, as it should. For instance, Italy needing to purchase a DD otherwise BB becoming vulnerable to US Sub. Without the rule “Sub cannot hit sub”, Italy would have kept a Sub along BB and not be afraid of US Sub first strike. Now, it is mandatory to purchase DD to counter Sub.
IMO, it is a small price to pay about a lesser ship-to-ship depiction (as we know that Subs were sinking Sub sometimes, mainly US vs Japan) to gain a better operational depiction of Subs against surface vessels. Like Destroyers are needed to protect and escort surface vessels against Subs.
I thought about a way to try one’s of Krieghund suggestion about Transport which is probably not difficult to make. It simply requires to create a Transport unit with A0 D0 C8, 1 hit.
Triple A will treat it as a combat unit.
That way, players will decide when they are going to take TP as casualties.
It would be player enforced whether to fully play according to Krieghund rules 1 combat unit cover 1 TP, or to use TP as additional fodder, pure and simple.
For instance, 1 Sub vs 1 DD & 1 TP, 1 hit from Sub.
Krieghund way: DD is taken as casualty, and TP is eventually sink too.
Otherway, TP is taken as casualty and Sub can decide to retreat or continue battle against DD.
That way would be halfway between defenseless and TP as regular combat unit A0 D1 1 hit.
It allows to keep OOB setup without extreme adjustments to TP becoming part of combat.
It makes for a more realistic way of treating TP in combat without giving combat capacities beyond 1 hit value.
TP is neither better on offense nor defense.
Anytime 1 unit can do something to an infinite number of opponent’s unit (DDs vs Subs, 1 DD & infinite aircraft vs Subs, combat units vs TPs), it creates unrealistic loopholes and gamey features.
I quoted 1 post which contains Krieghund replies on that topic.
@Baron:
@Baron:
How about this for a house rule idea: leave the transport rules exactly as they are, except transports in excess of combat units can be taken as casualties. This allows combat units to “screen” transports, but unscreened transports can be lost.
Example:
A fleet containing a carrier, 2 fighters, a destroyer, and 5 transports is attacked. The first hit could be taken on the carrier, damaging it. The next hit may be taken on a transport, as there are 5 transports but only 4 combat units. However, the following hit must be taken on a combat unit, as the number of transports and combat units is now equal. The remaining order of loss could be destroyer, transport, carrier, transport, fighter, transport, fighter, transport.I actually like Krieg’s solution a lot. transports are defended on a 1-1 basis.
I still cannot see why is this a solution?
TT become a 1 unit value @0 like AAA after first round.They will play a similar role, mostly if defender thinks he couldn’t make it against attacker’s units.
TT becomes cannon fodder or tampering unit for the defensive valuable unit (D2/D3/D4) like what many critics about classic pointed out.
What it does, is only regulate the rate of attrition amongst TT.
Exactly, but at a much weaker value than in Classic.
Transports still get used as a cheap soak off, when in reality attacking units would go for capital ships. Transports should get the hell out of a combat zone ASAP since the only thing they want is to survive!
Yes, but as someone pointed out, A&A is about choices. This gives the transport owner more control over order of loss, without using transports completely as a shield. However, it would probably be necessary to also outlaw attacking with transports unless doing an amphibious assault (and them only with loaded ones).
@Cow:
It costs much to protect them, it would reduce the cost a little if they had some defense value.
That is all people are getting at.
I believe that’s exactly what I proposed. Allowing transports to be conditionally taken as casualties gives them “some defense value” by allowing preservation of some combat unit firepower for a little longer without using them completely as cannon fodder. This leverages the value of your combat units, allowing you to purchase fewer of them for the same effect. You still have to protect your transports, but it’s a little easier to do so. It also preserves the requirement to give transports adequate protection, as they are still completely defenseless on their own.
Another example may illustrate this. Say you have a fleet consisting of a cruiser and three transports. Under the official rules, all an attacker need do is sink the cruiser, and the whole fleet goes down. Under my proposal, two of the transports can be lost before the cruiser. This gives the defender some cushion, but not nearly as much as it would in Classic, as the transports can’t fire. This extra bit of defense forces the attacker to bring more to the table than he would need to do under the current rules. However, the defense is still relatively weak, as the defender only gets one shot per round, so it’s still wise for the defender to provide more warships.
This Krieghund’s house rule change was discreetly suggested but not enough estimated, IMO.
This can provide something to better depicted the usual course of historical naval battle when Subs or Aircraft are attacking TPs and escort. They mainly target Transport and Troopship before escorting vessels.This rule almost get ride of Transport always Taken last thus improving player’s decision freedom.
It allows defender to sometime pick Transport as casualty as he sees fit.
It gives no defense besides escort defense rolls.
Instead of all combat units, what I would use as the bottom line to forbid taking TP as casualty is:
each friendly surface warship can only cover/escort 1 Transport.
The ratio would be 1 friendly surface warship for 1 Transport.
Any excess of TPs above this 1:1 ratio for close surface escort can be destroyed and worth 1 hit for casualty determination.Defender would be allowed to select TPs as casualty as long as he keeps 1 TP for each friendly surface warship.
That way, TP is treated defenseless but considered as 1 hit value for casualty selection.
IL and CWO Marc will feel it is more typical of transport (cargo and troops) combat effectiveness.The other point on historical depiction is that TP is reintroduced as a main target for enemy.
This allow defender the choice to pick or not his TPs in naval battle.Example:
1 Destroyer, 1 Sub and 3 Transports defending in SZ,
Defender may choose up to 2 TPs as casualty before loosing 1 DD or 1 Sub.
After loosing 2 TPs, if DD is picked as casualty over Sub, the last Transport can then be chosen as casualty. Submarine is not a surface vessel.
So, order of loss may be: 2 TPs, 1 DD, 1 TP, 1 Sub.
However, if Sub is chosen earlier like: 1 Sub, 2 TPs, 1 DD, then last TP will be auto-kill.Now, it reintroduced a better depiction of convoy raiding.
And the final stack is virtually reduced to 1 undefended TP, since defender may wish and is now allowed to alternate between a warship and a TP for final combat rounds.
Example:
3 Destroyers, 6 TPs
Order of losses: 3 TPs, 1 DD, 1 TP, 1 DD, 1 TP, 1 DD, 1 TP.Don’t you think it better reenact such kind of naval situations where TPs is lost because of an inefficient escort screen?
For my part, I believe that giving more options to defender allows more variability which, in return, might better take into account various WWII combat situations that occurs: from not loosing any TP, or not totally loosing all Escort and saving a few TPs, to barely saving 1 or 2 TPs while loosing all escorting ships.
How about this for a house rule idea: leave the transport rules exactly as they are, except transports in excess of combat units can be taken as casualties. This allows combat units to “screen” transports, but unscreened transports can be lost.
Transports still get used as a cheap soak off, when in reality attacking units would go for capital ships.
Transports should get the hell out of a combat zone ASAP since the only thing they want is to survive!
Kim
IDK, looking into Troopships and shipping Convoys, most of the time it seems these Transports were targeted first.
Sinking war materials and infantryman seems an high priority.
Anyone see why Capital ships were not always targeted first?I viewed that sometimes it is only a case of opportunity about which ships is closest and biggest.
In this documentary about 1944 Truk Atoll raid, it seems to be mostly IJN auxiliary ships first rather than few Destroyers and one or two Cruisers:
Battle 360 Episode 7 Hammer of Hell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V-2zQCbwc0Naval Battle of Guadalcanal revealed that IJN transports were sunk while some warships (Cruisers and DDs) survived.
Another case in which it makes good sense to allow sinking of Transports and more room for owner decision’s about casualty selection:In the resulting battle, both sides lost numerous warships in two extremely destructive surface engagements at night. Nevertheless, the U.S. succeeded in turning back attempts by the Japanese to bombard Henderson Field with battleships. Allied aircraft also sank most of the Japanese troop transports and prevented the majority of the Japanese troops and equipment from reaching Guadalcanal.
Japanese initial forces:
2 battleships
6 heavy cruisers
4 light cruisers
16 destroyers
11 transportsCasualties and losses
First phase 13 nov 1942:
1 battleship
1 heavy cruiser
2 destroyers
7 transports
Second phase 14-15 nov 1942:
1 battleship
1 destroyer
4 transports (beached first)
Plus:
64 aircraft
for a total of 1,900 killed (exclusive of transport losses)
I got time to add more details and much more elements from Triple A Redesign sequence (like targeted First strike: Interdiction Patrol)
:-D
This is a unit profiles for G40 Redesign, I will try to test on my boardgame.
Do you think it can be interesting on board map game?
The Depth Charge sequence for Destroyer is inspired by YG’s 3G40 project.
This allows to not block Sub’s submerge (which is realistic from a ship-to-ship POV).
I also used SS long time play-tested HR, Destroyer blocking Sub’s Surprise strike on a 1:1 basis.
These two abilities seem better at depicting Sub warfare with not so complex mechanic.
The Naval sequence will be:
0- Interdiction Patrol: 1 roll @1 against Sub or surface vessels (up to 1 roll max against each unit) crossing SZ defended by Sub or Destroyer (against Sub only), prior to actual combat.
1- Submerge or Surprise strike
2- Anti-Sub Patrol: Depth charge against submerged Subs
Increasing dogfight occurrences:
Up to two aircraft, either Fighter or Tac Bomber, can land in a just conquered territory, if aircraft have 2 move left for NCM after battle.
A land unit must first conquered the territory before allowing any aircraft to land on.
Keeping 2 basic units of G40 Redesign cost structure:
Destroyer A1 D1 C5 (0.96),
Submarine A2 D1 C6 (1.33, 0.67)
But all other units are adjusted according to ENIGMA-Vann formula so to keep
Cruiser A3 D3 C8 (1.13) and
Battleship A4 D4 C15 (1.12), 2 hits, better in combat compared to Destroyer (0.96) but both even combat ratio based on same IPC basis (1.12).
Fleet Carrier A0 D2 C12 (0.87), 2 hits, still carry only 2 aircraft and is stronger than OOB Carrier (0.49) on same IPCs basis, but weaker in absolute combat values.
Still, Full Carrier with 2 Fgs A2 D2 for A4 D7 C26 (0.72, 1.11) has a stronger combat factor than
OOB Full Carrier A6 D10 C36 (0.53, 0.88).
Full Carrier 1 TcB & 1 Fg A5 D7 C27 (0.77, 1.03) is stronger than
OOB Full Carrier 1 TcB & 1 Fg A7 D9 C37 (0.48, 0.75)
Also, both aircraft types have special abilities which can compensate and also because of cheaper Full Carrier compared to OOB units.
Tactical Bomber A3 D2 C8 (1.13, 0.75) now gets targeting capacity on Sea and Land units, and also get Depth charge @1 against submerged Subs.
Fighter A2 D2 C7 (0.98) directly fire at aircraft first, as usual for my HR. But treated as OOB when there is no enemy’s aircraft.
Strategic Bombers cannot be part of regular combat, but get A1 in SBR dogfight.
This units profile allows a full spectrum of combat values for Naval combat:
Carrier A0 D2 C12, DD A1 D1 C5, Sub A2 D1 C6, Fg A2 D2 C7, TcB A3 D2 C8, Cruiser A3 D3 C8, BB A4 D4 C15
Now, Cruiser at 8 IPCs is taking the middle place of Destroyer in OOB roster
Of course, setup will need adjustments because of cheaper aircraft and Carrier.
Rating is 2 OOB Full Carrier A12 D20 C72 –-> 3 Full Carrier A12 D21 C78
2 OOB Fighter A3 D4 C10 (A6 D8 C20) —> 3 Fighter A2 D2 C7 (A6 D6 C21)
2 Tactical Bomber A3-4 D3 C11 (A6 D6 C22) —> 3 TacB A3 D2 C8 (A9 D6 C24)
2 Strategic bomber A4 D1 C12 —> 3 StB A0 D0 C5 & 1 TcB A3 D2 C8
Also, cheaper boats will increase the pressure on Axis much earlier in game.
However, Subs are still potent offensive units with pretty good elusive capacity.
Destroyer (0.96) (Depth charge on submerged Sub: 1.92 max)
Attack 1
Defense 1
Move 2-3
Cost 5
1 hit
Cannot block Subs CM or NCM,
but each Sub moving through a SZ controlled by Destroyer must submit to 1 @1 anti-sub defense roll per DD, up to 1 roll @1 per Submarine.
Block Submarine’s First strike on a 1:1 basis
Cannot block submerge but can Depth charge submerging Sub:
Depth charge against submerged Subs, after Submerge or First Strike phase and prior to regular combat:
1 roll @1, only for on going combat round, up to 1 roll per submerged Submarine max.
Destroyer doing Depth charge can still roll in regular combat.
1D in Convoy SZ
Submarine (1.33, 0.67 / FS 2.00, 0.89)
Attack 2
Defense 1
Move 2-3
Cost 6
1 hit
Cannot block Subs or surface vessels CM or NCM,
but each Submarine or surface vessel moving through a SZ patrolled by Sub (Sub cannot control SZ) must submit to 1 @1 Sub potshot defense roll per defending Sub, up to 1 roll @1 per Submarine or surface ship moving through SZ, whichever the lower.
Stealth Move: Submarine CM or NCM is not block by Destroyer and
in Combat Move, only Subs attacking do not allow scramble from adjacent Air Base
Submerge or First strike prior to 2- Depth charge and 3- General Combat phase,
First strike: Destroyer blocks Submarine’s First strike on 1:1 basis
Submerge: Destroyer does not block submerge but can do Depth charge at submerged Sub, up to 1 roll @2 per Sub max.
Cannot hit Submarines nor aircraft.
2D in Convoy SZ.
Transport (0.00)
[variant Move 3-4]
Attack 0
Defense 0
Move 2-3
Cost 7
0 hit
Taken as last casualty,
Carry 1 Inf+1 any ground
Transport (reg combat variant) (0.38 or less)
[Variant M3: Move 3-4, Cost 8, 1 hit, each TP also gets 1 escape roll @1]
Attack 0
Defense 1* * 1@1 for all friendly TPs group in SZ
Move 2-3
Cost 8
1 hit
Carry 1 Inf+1 any ground
Can be taken as casualty according to owner’s choice.
Cruiser (1.13)
[Variant M3: Move 3-4, Cost 9, 1 hit, (0.89)]
Attack 3
Defense 3
Move 2-3
Cost 8
1 hit
Shore bombardment @3
1D in Convoy SZ
Fleet Carrier (0.00, 0.87)
Attack 0
Defense 2
Move 2-3
Cost 12
2 hits
Carry 2 planes (Fg or TcB):
2 Fgs A4 D7 C26 (0.72, 1.11),
1 Fg & 1 TcB A5 D7 C27 (0.77, 1.03),
2 TcBs A6 D6 C28 (0.83, 0.79)
Air operation allowed for 1 plane, if damaged.
Gives +1 Defense to 1 Fighter defending when paired 1:1 with Carrier (Carrier Air Patrol)
Battleship (1.12)
Attack 4
Defense 4
Move 2-3
Cost 15
2 hits
Shore bombardment @4
1D in Convoy SZ
Fighter (0.98) (SBR: 0.98)
Attack 2
Defense 2-3 (3) when being supported by an AB in invaded TT or a Carrier in embattled SZ, on 1:1 basis
Move 4-5 (M6 from AB as escort for bombers)
Cost 7
1 hit
Hit aircraft first, then AAA, then owner’s selecting his own casualties as usual.
SBR A2 D2,
1D in Convoy SZ.
Needs no Destroyer to hit Subs.
Can retreat aircraft 1 adjacent TTy after first combat round (announce before attacker’s retreat).
Tactical Bomber (1.13, 0.75) (Depth charge: 0.38) (TBR: 0.38)
Attack 3
Defense 2
Move 4-5 (M6 from AB for TBR only)
Cost 8
1 hit
Can pick any land or naval enemy’s unit (excluding aircraft) if rolling a hit
TBR A1 D1, damage 1D6 on AB & NB (avg dmg ratio: 3.5 IPC /8 IPCs= 0.4375 or 2.92 - 8/6 = 1.6 IPCs damage / SBR)
1D in Convoy SZ
Needs no Destroyer to hit Subs.
Depth charge against submerged Subs, after Submerge or First Strike phase and prior to regular combat:
1 roll @1, only for on going combat round, no max roll per submerged Submarine (stackable rolls).
Tactical Bombers doing Depth charge can still roll in regular combat.
Can retreat aircraft 1 adjacent TTy, after first combat round (announce before attacker’s retreat).
Strategic Bomber (0.00/ SBR: 0.96)
Attack 0
Defense 0
Move 6-8 (M8 from AB for SBR only)
Cost 5
0 hit in regular combat,
SBR 1 hit, A1 D0, damage 1D6 (avg dmg ratio: 3.5 IPCs /5 IPCs= 0.7 or 2.9 - 5/6 = 2.1 IPCs damage / SBR)
[OOB avg dmg ratio: 5.5 IPCs /12 IPCs =[i] 0.458 or 4.6 - 12/6 = 2.6 IPCs damage / SBR]
OOB G40: 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
5/6 StB survived * 5.5 IPCs = 4.583 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *12 IPCs = -2 IPCsSum: 4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/StB run
1 StB Cost 5 damage D6 doing SBR without interceptor
5/6 StB survived * 3.5 IPCs = 2.917 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *5 IPCs = -0.833 IPCsSum: 2.917 - 0.833 = +2.084 IPCs damage/StB run
1 TcB Cost 8 damage D6 doing TBR without interceptor
5/6 TcB survived * 3.5 IPCs = 2.92 IPCs
1/6 TcB killed *8 IPCs = -1.33 IPCsSum: 2.92 - 1.33 = +1.59 IPCs damage/TcB run
Air Base
Cost 12
Giving +1M, +2M on SBR or TBR only,
Gives +1 Defense to 1 Fighter defending either AB’s territory or adjacent SZ & TT.
Allows up to four units to scramble, either Fg or TcB.
Scramble can occur in either an adjacent SZ or an adjacent TT.
Do not allow scramble if only Submarines attacking an adjacent SZ.
Anti-Aircraft Artillery (0.00, 3.00 / AA from 1.50 up to 4.50)
Attack 0
Defense 2 or 3AA@1
Move 1
Cost 4
1 hit
Roll 3@1 vs up to three aircraft, 1 roll max per aircraft or, if no enemy’s aircraft, roll regular defense @2.
This is not preemptive fire: roll in regular combat phase.
Move as any ground unit in CM and NCM.
If AAA against up to 3 aircraft:
1/6 TcB shoot down *8 IPCs = 1.33 IPCs * 3 = 4.00
1/6 Fg shoot down *7 IPCs = 1.17 IPCs * 3 = 3.50
Average:
3.75 IPCs shoot down per combat round if at least 3 attacking aircraft
2.50 IPCs shoot down per combat round if only 2 attacking aircraft
1.25 IPCs shoot down per combat round if only 1 attacking aircraft
If AAA against up to 2 aircraft:
1/6 TcB shoot down *8 IPCs = 1.33 IPCs * 2 = 2.66
1/6 Fg shoot down *7 IPCs = 1.17 IPCs * 2 = 2.34
Average:
2.50 IPCs shoot down per combat round if at least 2 attacking aircraft
1.25 IPCs shoot down per combat round if only 1 attacking aircraft
Here is additional units which are optional and require new sculpts to play with:
Militia (0.00, 6.00)
Attack 0
Defense 1
Move 1
Cost 2
1 hitMarines (2.67-5.33, 2.67)
Attack 1-2
Defense 1
Move 1
Cost 3
+1 Attack in amphibious assault,
TP can carry 2 Marines, can load 1 on BattleshipBunker (0.00, 2.88)
Attack 0
Defense 3
Move 0
Cost 5
2 hits
Requires 1 Inf, MI, Art, Elite, Marines or militia to work.
1 such unit must share same TTy to repair damage.Mobile Artillery (1.92, 1.92-2.38)
Attack 2
Defense 2-3
Move 2
Cost 5
Can blitz but cannot give blitz to Mech Infantry,
Gives +1A to Inf or MI, paired 1:1
Gets +1D paired 1:1 with TankElite Infantry unit (1.92)
Attack 2
Defense 2
Move 1-2
Cost 5
Can load 1 on Battleship, or 2 on TP,
Gets +1M paired 1:1 with Tank and blitz with it,
Can load 1 on Air TP during move CM or NCM,Air Transport
Attack 0
Defense 0
Move 5-6
Cost 7
1 hit
Load 1 Elite unit CM or NCM.Escort Carrier or Light Carrier, as a Sub Hunter (0.49)
Attack 0
Defense 1
Move 2-3
Cost 7
1 hit
Carry 1 Fg (0.49, 0.98) or 1 TcB (0.64, 0.64)
_Gives +1 Defense to 1 Fighter defending when paired 1:1 with Carrier (CAP)
Escort Carrier blocks Submarine’s First strike on 1:1 basis,
Does not block Submerge.
Cannot block Subs CM or NCM,
but each Sub moving through a SZ controlled by CVE must submit to 1 @1 anti-sub defense roll per Escort Carrier, up to 1 roll @1 per Submarine.Military Base
Cost 12
Allows to built up to three Infantry and can be built on 0 or 1 IPC TT or Island.
Has 6 damage points, not operational if 3 or more damage.
Built-in AAgun._
@SS:
Its fine. Just no autokill for all attacking pieces.
You dont like it ?
2 DD
2 CR
2 BB attacking5 Transports.
2 DD = 1 hit
2 CR = 1 hit
2 BB = 1 hit
3 hits 3 Transports killed
2 Transports escape roll 1,2
2 Transports escapeNo ?
I’m all ok with this.
I just copy-paste from TP : “d) Escape attempt for Transport @2, if alone and being attacked by only subs or planes and is not killed per round.”
I did not realize you slightly change to include surface vessels in comment below.
“d) Escape attempt for Transport @2, if alone and being attacked by surface ships and or subs or planes and is not killed per round.”
Sorry.
I did not realized you included surface warships too.
@SS:
@Baron:
Subs can submerge after DF or Tac FS
Subs doing FS have to stay surfaced.
Cannot submerge until next round of combat.
Submerged subs after 1 round of combat can
1. Resurface
2. Stay Submerged
3. Escape @3. Place on map same sz.
If escape roll fails Sub has to resurface.
Surfaced subs can be taken as casualties.GW40 SS sequence:
1. DF or Tac FS
2. Submerge or Sub’s First strike
3. Depth charge (DD @3 targeting submerged Subs, instead of general combat)
4. General combat
5. Escape or else:
a) Resurface or b) Stay Submerged
c) Escape attempt for Sub @3. Place on map same SZ if succeed.
If escape roll fails, Sub has to resurface.
d) Escape attempt for Transport @2, if alone and being attacked by only subs or planes and is not killed per round.All surfaced subs can be taken as casualties
All Destroyers can be taken as casualtiesAm I right?
Yes but d) Escape attempt for Transport @2, if alone and being attacked by surface ships and or subs or planes and is not killed
Per round.
So what do you intent to mean with your last comment?
