Posts made by lnmajor

Drop fighters to 6 ipcs. Also, Will Tacs still increase fighter attack value +1?

i like this idea. this idea could work well with using it as a tech such as stategic targeting. or added to heavy bomber tech. this will also could come in handy if HBG starts making light, meduim and heavy bombers

ALWAYS let the dice decide. That is the “fog of war”. If you cant handle it try Statego or Battleship. :-D

I agree with your thinking on the role of stratigic bombers. the tac bomber has somewhat replaced this piece on the battlefield. I am thinking more along the lines of SBs to make initail preemptive attack in opening of land combat, first round only causilties removed immeadiately. SBs can be left in enemy TT to reduce mobility on opponets turn, sort of like SBs are taking out roads and RR systems, reducing tanks and mechs to 1 move. maybe infantry cant move out of TT in this situation. also, i really like the idea of 3 or more SBs is considered carpet bombing and enemy units defence is reduced by 1. But i do think SBs attack value should be kept at 4.

for that price and how much damage they wouldnt do, i would never buy them. the cost of your potential losses far exceed the damage you can bring to the enemy :|

Thats awesome!!! Way to go!!!

@acampo22:

I have two concerns with this discussion thread…

1. Strategic bombing is not cost effective.  Every time you go in (assuming no fighter cover either that would make it even worse) you have 1/6 chance of loss to anti-aircraft fire and should average 3 damage per bomber.  So average 3 damage and 2 loss (1/6 of 12 ipc cost) - sorry that’s too easily swayed by bad dice.  One often finds themselves out a few bombers for doing little damage.  I’d rather use strats in combat and wipe out significant units.

2. Proposing 20 IPC for a unit that you want to have a 1 or 2 attack/defense value?  Why would anyone ever buy one?  I can buy 2 fighters for the same and roll with 3’s and 4’s.

Just my thoughts.

I agree with this. bombers still should attack at 4

O.M.G
i have that map. bought it like 12yrs ago for about $20.00. this guy is retarted. i hope no one pays that, they can have mine.

nubs, i agree with you 100%. i have been messing with ideas like bombers roll first in attacking. this is preemtive and causlties are removed immediately. they only roll once at the beggining of combat. they can be intercepted by fighters thou before they drop their bombs. also they can only be hit by anti aircraft guns or fighters. also if you use 3 or more bombers in an attack, this is considered carpet bombing and infantry cant defend at all.

@Fishmoto37:

@SSPanther:

What do you guys out there think about the concept towed artillery, that is mechanized infantry being able to move artillery with it on a 1:1 basis?

We are using this in our current game. Works great! We are using Tigerman’s map along with other house rules. One of the main improvements we are working on is improving the submarine rules. The OOB rules for subs in the 1940G game are weak!

what are you doing with subs

How about artillery doing preemtive attacks every round on attack and defence. could thin out stacks of infantry quicker and resolve combat quicker. also, very realistic,

In the long run you will find you spent almost 80% of the cost of the initail purchese anyway. save youself the aggravation and just buy it used on ebay.

planes and subs should have to make a locate roll to spot ships. 1-3 ships are found and can be fired at. if only subs are attacking transports, subs roll for detection, if found, subs fire. causlties removed. surviving transports make an escape roll. on 1-2 transports get to slip away and contact with subs is broken off.
enemy  warships entering seazone with unescorted enemy transports make a detection roll. if found, die roll is made. 1-4 transports sunk, 5 or 6 transports and cargo become property of attacking nation ( infantry are removed).

letting land units choose targets on round one with general, great idea! :wink:

used your draft idea for many years. used 2 die thou. good idea but not for everybody. can throw the game one way or the other depending on luck of the die.

Before you know it, every territory will have a Airbase / Minor / Navalbase,  There will be more political rules than ever, and victory conditions will be reduced to “play until someone else gives up.”
I couldnt agree with you more.

Just checked out your map. Looks like this could be the best AA map todate. Havent looked at your rules yet. 12d system takes the game to new level as long as its done right and isnt too confusing.

I think what WOODSTOCK is getting at for the amount of money he invested he feels that more effort could have been put into playtesting and getting it more dialed in before launching it.

You make a great point there. :|

I have won games as Axis by taunting the Allied players and creating a situation were by applying the right amount of pressure on one country then they feel like their allie is not committing enough troops to support them and there is a breakdown of cooperation between them. OH, then the fun starts. But as long as the primary focous of conversation is the game, its all good.