Posts made by baron Münchhausen

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

Well could have just in
Capitals AAA D@3 each plane

This solution works only for the main Moscow battle.

If there is other hot spots outside, like in mainland Asia this rule would not apply.
However, if absolutely needed to balance massive aircraft combat, it can become a special rule (for Moscow or UK (Sea Lion) or Berlin or Japan, mostly) if there is 3 AAA in a Capital city, AAA defend once @3 First strike against each incoming aircraft.

I’m just toying around with this challenge of Air Dominance, to develop a better concept. This situation at a smaller scale happens early in (AA50, 1942.2) games with Cairo and Chinese Flying tigers.

As you know, all my game played with TcB picking ground/naval target and Fg shooting aircraft first.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

Depends on how many figs Russia has.
The AAA gun helps Russia but as I mentioned depends on figs. I have more figs in Russia and from LL chart plus 1 but 2 turn one so I can intercept German bombers.

IMO, allowing AAA to be use as some kind of shield (can be taken as casualty instead of aircraft) is a way to boost the strength of defending aircraft in numerical inferiority.

For example, if each AAA @2 1 roll on each aircraft max., 1 hit Cost 5 are somehow split in half.
You get 1 AAA, 1 hit, A0 D0 1 first strike roll @1 only in opening round but up to 2 roll can be assigned on each incoming aircraft for 3 IPCs (or even 2 IPCs).

If there is 2 Fg or more against 1 AAA, each plane are against 1 roll 1/12.
But, if there is at least two AAA in a given territory, each plane must face 2 rolls @1.

From a statistical POV, it is mostly the same: 1 @2 on 1 plane or 2@1 on 1 plane. 2/12 = 16.7% compared to 23/144 = 16% (1/12 * 1/12 = 1/144 hit twice but 1 shot down and 1/12* 11/12 + 11/12 * 1/12 = 22/144 hit once)
So, it can be simplified: if there is at least two AAA in a given territory, each plane must face 1 roll @2
AAA:1 hit, A0 D0 1 first strike roll @1 only in opening round but, there is 2 AAA or more, @2 roll is assigned on each incoming aircraft for 3 IPCs (or even 2 IPCs)

So, for a given Fighter AD@4 C6, hit allocated on AAA or aircraft (owner’s choice) first, if any available.
If there is air dominance, like 2 attacking Fg for 1 defending aircraft, for example, defender might use AAA unit as casualty instead of a precious Fighter or worse a Tactical Bomber.

From a balance POV, if Fighter cost 6, then each AAA A0 D0 @1FS, 1 hit might only cost 2 IPCs. If you compare such 3 AAA (6 IPCs) vs 1 Fighter (6 IPCs) which is far more versatile for all attack, defense, target and mobility. The main value of such unit would be the defensive capacity, but still a limited one.

@SS-GEN
Reducing the impact of Fighter dominance over defending aircraft, for instance.

@SS-GEN

From an older post I wrote about the lesson learns from Moscow air battle.
Do you agree with me on the bolded sentence?

There is two other factors to mitigate the Air dominance:
AAA cost and soaking capacity.
Air retreat, especially for aircraft on defense.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

Another thing thinking of is now with this the Inf is not that strong against Figs.
I can see the Fig going down to AD@4 because if you have figs in a battle the Inf is taken as the casualty first and by the time Fig attack ground the Inf will be gone and now fig is were I feel it should be. But when we tested this fig AD@4 it was to weak according to the guys play Pacific. But also some said a fig shouldn’t get to kill a BB. BB would get normal hit and ship aa @1. So now that makes it better for ship defense.

I agree with the Pacific guys within the usual Japanese set up with a lot of Fighters. It becomes a big drop of firepower if there is no additional Fg unit placed on the starting setup.

After 2 gametests, I revised all this by giving 1 Fg for each 2 Fgs or 1 TcB for each 2 TcB in the setup.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

@baron-Münchhausen
Right that’s why I have rest of stuff with bonus plane kills for all scenarios in a battle
Nobody gonna play air surppotity

This one was about which quote?

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

@baron-Münchhausen
I think every round is to strong. They only had 1 torpedo or bomb. Some 2 but once they drop it based on turn one where they ain’t gonna wait then just guns AD

From my tests with smaller scale board game, not an issue.

Also, I tend to give capacities according to a season time frame of many sorties. Each combat round, can be seen as a whole week or 2 weeks of combat. So there is many loading ordnance, lift-off, drop-off and dogfight, landing, reloading.

So, a double hit from a DF bonus roll is seen, on my behalf, as the way you describe. In a week, both ground and dofgfight occur and TcB squadrons won both.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

@baron-Münchhausen
Not for balance. They were decent on accuracy then only used there guns after dropping payloads

I see.
With my own HR, I played TacB picking ground target each round with @6 (3 on D6).
It was well countered by fighters @4 (2 on D6).
Most of the time, there was not that much hit with TcBs but I was playing with smaller scale game: 1942.2 or AA50.

G40 Germany’s and Japan’s larger fleet of TcB might have a greater impact.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

Yes all planes cost 8 icps. Tac @5 when ?
I like the pick target first turn

Is it the balance issue, pick target @5 seems high, even if just first round?

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

@baron-Münchhausen
Ya maybe. I do know the German Tac ace killed 40 tanks just with his guns. But is @5 to strong for rest of countries based on history ?
You meant raise the tac bomber To @5 ?

I’m strictly talking within the framework suggested a few post before, and tried by you. Between Fighter and TacB, if Fg are @5 chasing planes, seems fair to give TcB (are they at same cost?) @5 as a regular roll.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

Another thing thinking of is now with this the Inf is not that strong against Figs.
I can see the Fig going down to AD@4 because if you have figs in a battle the Inf is taken as the casualty first and by the time Fig attack ground the Inf will be gone and now fig is were I feel it should be. But when we tested this fig AD@4 it was to weak according to the guys play Pacific. But also some said a fig shouldn’t get to kill a BB. BB would get normal hit and ship aa @1. So now that makes it better for ship defense.

Another cue from my long ago playtests is when Carrier have at least the same defense factor than aircraft, then people loose aircraft before carrier.
It is less strange than long battle which finish with Battleship against fighter.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

Baron I see where you might be going with this fig AD@5 but no plane bonus kill.
I tested a ground battle and what I saw was when figs had hits the tac bombers were taken due to hitting on 4 after first turn and saving figs is more important and also while this was going on, first round Tacs got there pick hits then mostly rest of rounds as figs where killing the Tacs and not ground while the ground pieces where having there own battle with a tac hit here or there until they were gone. I did this battle.
Attacker
4 Inf
4 Art
4 Tanks
4 Tacs
4 Figs
same for defender.
The attacker won battle mostly based on
attacking figs rolling better the first 2 rounds and defending ground had more misses.
Odds are defender wins battle barely.
1 Art
2 Tanks
3 Figs

I will have to test naval combats because more figs mostly. Oh but the Cruiser !
By taking the Tac/Dive bombers is like what really happened in war
based on figs going after them.
I think that Tac/Dive Bomber should get bonus plane kill @1 after first turn after dropping payload though so balance it a bit more for Dog Fighting.

I pretty like the way you are doing the play tests as a proof of concept viability. No need to play for real, but just trying a few plausible combats between ground and air or naval and air units.

According to your depiction of this battle, it seems to put Tacbomber at a disadvantage round after round. I would feel better and find it simpler to give the bonus DF on a 1 roll, since the beginning of round 1.

Maybe, in this case we are talking, TcB need to be lowered to @5 after first round (instead of @4) to keep them efficient against ground units.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

@baron-Münchhausen
OK. My concern is with fig hitting plane first if available being to strong. This would make air suppority a bit to strong. I get what your saying but that’s a big change. I’ll have to test that.

I don’t believe every fig was just fighting fighters in war. Could see if this works
AD@5 + roll 3 or less get a bonus plane kill.
Got to watch this because I’ve seen normal battles where one side kills more planes than other. The Axis have the advantage in early rounds too. This would make Russia weaker based on Moscow battles. Russia needs those figs to stay in combat rounds longer.
As far as testing or playing more or less right now it works great based on ya u kill more planes but it doesn’t over power it to one side where they controlling air.

Thanks for sharing your gaming and HR developer experience SS.
Air dominance with such Fighter is a challenge. I see.

I bolded the main topics I want to comment.

My concerns is about the double hit from DF bonus.
From a depictive POV, it seems less adequate to give this double hit to Fighter units. (Warships shoot both naval and air. TacBombers can bomb landing fields, or be part of dogfight, etc.)

What would happen if Fighter becomes cheaper and weaker?
Fighter Cost 6
AD@4 (+ roll 4 or less) you may assign hit on aircraft (owner’s chose aircraft type).

Same cost as Tank (A6 D6 C6, right?) which have better attack and defense factor.
Tactical, in that case: C8 AD@6, @1 or less, get a bonus aircraft hit.

There is two other factors to mitigate the Air dominance:
AAA cost and soaking capacity.
Air retreat, especially for aircraft on defense.

@SS-GEN said in SS GEN's 1941 Global War Game:

So you want the or saying fig should be
AD@5 and can kill a plane with no bonus ?
Who determines the hit ? I maybe gettin this confused.
Yes I can make Stg bomber also have to wait after first round for DF @1. Makes sense.

If Strategic bomber get no DF bonus, I’m all ok with this because it was not their main purpose. Fighter were chasing them, not the other way around,

Yes, Fighter hit at 5 or less AND opponent must pick a plane as casualty, if any available. Of course, if there is none, he choose any unit remaining in combat.

This is the idea. Fighter cannot get a double hit but hit harder on aircraft.

Cruiser and BB remain dual purpose, as they have a lot of hardpoints with turrets for ships or aircrafts. It makes sense they can get a bonus hit on plane.

@SS-GEN

“Don’t forget planes are dog fighting same time as combat.
Figs C8 AD@5 2 or less bonus DF plane kill
Tac/Dive roll a 1 after first round get a bonus DF plane kill too
Stg Bomber rolls a 1 get a bonus DF plane kill too.
May drop this based on there focus is dropping payload first round only so can’t DF on first round like Tac dive”

I see how you play the bonus dogfight.

Cruiser and Fighter are pretty close in cost: 9 vs 8.

Just my two cents,
Keeping the bonus planes kill for Cruiser (2), Battleship (1), Tac and Strat bombers (1).

But what about making Fighter just killing plane if there is any?
With no double hit bonus.
Figs C8 AD@5, 5 or less bonus plane kill if there is any.

All have more bomb shells (turrets for warships) and AA guns than Fighter while Fighter were built first against other planes.
My question is mostly about impact of this idea on your game flow and mechanic playability.

If this can work, then Fighter cost can be drop to 7 IPCs because of higher casualty rate (as they become the Artillery of air vs TcB, being AirTank).

@Imperious-Leader
On Baltic convoys in 1942.2 or AA50, instead of Norway Sz, it is about giving a real opportunity for Germany to defend it against USSR Sub or other Allies built in Atlantic.

The scale and pace of this game cannot give room for a working weak spot so far from Germany’s influence in Norway SZ, even if this only 1 SZ away from Baltic. Trying to protect this SZ outside is a waste of money or units. So, it remains almost a deprivation of Germany’s IPCs with no way to win the upper hand.

In Baltic, when Germany abandon ship building, then it still becomes an Allied Sub raiding zone.
Just a bit later.

So, it is the compromising between play balance and historical accuracy.

@SS-GEN

Cruiser being M3 can be a bit weaker per cost ratio compared to DD or BB.

And I believe making the main AA warship is good.

DD as is now seems cool.

Maybe BB repair cost might be the issue.
To provide more versatility and ease of deployment, I would try something like:
NB repairs BB for 2 IPCs AND allows repair in a given SZ with Island or land TT without NB for twice the cost (4 IPCs).

@baron-Münchhausen

After a few test, I would say 3 IPCs token per SZs is fairly balanced for both AA50 and 1942.2.
Probably G40 economy is better with 4 IPCs Convoy SZ.
The issue is how you roll damage with Subs.
For instance, 1, 2 means 1 IPC, 3 & 4 means 2 IPCs, 5 & 6 means 3 IPCs.
OR 1, 2 , 3 worth 1, 2 or 3 while 4, 5, 6 means 3 IPCs also. The SZ has been maxed out.
OR, 1, 2, 3 worth 1, 2 or 3 IPCs, 4, 5, 6 means zero IPC.
Or, damage is 1 IPC + d6 roll: 3, 4, 5, 6 meaning plus zero for 1 IPC damage, 1 roll meaning 2 and 2 roll for 3 IPCs damage.

To what extent do you want auto damage from Sub convoy raiding?

I don’t have definite answer on that matter.

@MGregersen

These adjustments are still working for G40, with exception of Japan. At most, I would add a full Carrier (Fg and TcBs) and 2 additional TcBs. In IJN SZ.

The Convoy rule helps delay Allies built up and IPCs losses is balanced also by cheaper warships and aircrafts.
The Subwarefare work well in combination with C5 A1 D1 Destroyer.

@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