Posts made by Midnight_Reaper

@Imperious-Leader said in 1942.2 All ships cost 2 ipcs less:

The wholescale reduction benefits Allied players who have more money to spend, and require a large naval presence to establish themselves.

And if 1942.2 is biased towards the Axis, wouldn’t that in turn help return things to a balance?

-Midnight_Reaper

@Militarized-Milkmen said in Cold War: It's Finally Done:

NATO
Mechanized Infantry: M59
Rocket Artillery: Douglas MGR-1 Honest John
Tank: M48 Patton
AA: MIM-3 Nike Ajax
Air Superiority Fighter: North American F-100 Super Sabre
Strike Fighter: Republic F-84 Thunderstreak
Bomber: Boeing RB-29 Stratofortress
Transport: Raleigh-Class or maybe Austin-Class
Submarine: Tang-Class
Destroyer: Forrest Sherman-Class
Cruiser: Baltimore-Class
Aircraft Carrier: Forrestal-Class

You seem to have quite a few sculpt ideas, both this set and the following sets. I have some commentary (from the peanut gallery) on this set, if you please. While I agree in general that the more sculpts the better, I thought you might have overlooked some other options, which I think would be improvements over what you have gathered.

No comments, sound good:

Mechanized Infantry: M59
Rocket Artillery: Douglas MGR-1 Honest John
Tank: M48 Patton
AA: MIM-3 Nike Ajax
Transport: Raleigh-Class or maybe Austin-Class
Destroyer: Forrest Sherman-Class
Aircraft Carrier: Forrestal-Class

Some commentary
Bomber: Boeing RB-29 Stratofortress / B-47 or B-50
RB-29s were a photo-reconnaissance variant of the B-29 made from repurposed WW2-design B-29s. The post-war version of the B-29 were the B-50s, which were production copies of the “Silverplate” modified, nuclear capable B-29s. They are, admittedly, hard to tell apart from B-29s. B-47 jet bombers, on the other hand, were the first major jet bombers used by the Air Force and notably visually different from WW2 era bombers. I think that either B-47s or B-50s would be better than RB-29s.

Submarine: Tang-Class / Skipjack
Skipjacks were the first production nuclear-powered subs with a hull design optimized for underwater speed (the very first production nuclear-powered subs, the Skates, were Tangs with nuclear-power). The rounded hull shape would be different from WW2 submarine designs.

Cruiser: Baltimore-Class / Boston or Des Moines Classes
The Baltimore class was another WW2 design. After the war the Navy took two Baltimores and modified them to carry anti-aircraft missiles, making them the first class of missile-armed cruisers, the Boston class. If Bostons are a bridge too far, the ultimate gun-armed cruisers were the Des Moines class. I think that sculpts of either Bostons or Des Moines would be better than “more” Baltimores.

Air Superiority Fighter: Republic F-86 Sabre
Strike Fighter: Republic F-84 Thunderstreak -
maybe F-84 Thunderjets, to be different from F-86s
F-84 Thunderstreaks look very much like like Sabre jets - single engine swept-wing jets. F-84 Thunderjets, on the other hand, have straight wings and would be much easier to tell apart from Sabre jets. Why are both called “F-84” when they look so different? Ask the Air Force, I don’t know. Some pictures to help show the differences.
Straight wing Thunderjets:

Sabres, with their swept-wings:

Swept-wing Thunderstreaks:

Just some thoughts of mine, likely worth every penny you paid for them.

-Midnight_Reaper

@Imperious-Leader said in 1942.2 House Rules Draft 1.1:
{snip}

New units
Transports plane 0-0-4 costs 8 ipc takes one paratrooper in combat phase or two infantry in ncm. paratroopers are a new dedicated infantry type ( can be boosted by artillery and tanks) The drop can be no more than 2 spaces from your land units and can be over oceans. If transports are attacked, they cannot be taken as a causality until the last defending unit is removed ( Not dissimulator from transports). They cannot block a tank blitzing or any land unit moving 2 spaces.

Airborne Infantry (3)(2)(1)-2-1 cost 6 Note: attack 3 in the 1st round, 2 in the 2nd, and 1 in the third and latter, place HBG markers under these. Cannot have more than 6 airborne units at any one time.

Airborne might need to change into a tech, looking at that now. Yea i will scrap lend lease and add them. Lend lease was always kinda overpowering over time

I like this new set of suggested rules. Transport Planes instead of Bombers, with the transport planes being useless for anything other than moving Infantry. Airborne Infantry units that work the way you prefer them to work. With the Airborne ability locked behind a technology Germany (or any other power) won’t be able to parachute into an undefended territory from the start of the game.

Of course, now that I’ve had a night to mull this over as well, I have a new idea for what I think would be a more streamlined implementation of airborne infantry / paratroopers. This idea requires the use of neither bombers nor transport planes to get airborne infantry into battle. I will admit from the start that while these rules might be more straight forward they are almost certainly a step or two up in complexity.

My suggestion would be to have airborne infantry / paratroopers be locked behind a technology and then once a power has that technology I would have it work this way:

Airborne Infantry This is a unit upgrade that is purchased on the turn it is to be used. The upgrade costs 1 IPC and may only be applied to Infantry units that start their turn in a territory with planes (fighters, fighter bombers, or bombers) of that power. Not more than 1/2 (rounded down) of Infantry in a territory may be upgraded to Airborne Infantry. A power may not purchase more than 6 (or 5) airborne unit upgrades in a turn.

Infantry are upgraded to Airborne Infantry during the Purchase Units phase and must be marked in a unique way, either by marker or piece. This marker or piece can be generic, as no unit remains Airborne Infantry after the powers’ turn. During a movement phase (either Combat Move or Noncombat Move), an Airborne Infantry unit may move as if it were a plane unit, with the exceptions of a limit of 2 space movement and no requirement for return movement. Any remaining Airborne Infantry are turned into normal infantry in the Mobilize New Units phase of the owning power.

Stats: Attack: (3)(2)(1)* Defence: 2 Move: 2* Cost 1* Notes:

• Airborne Infantry are noted as such in a unique way.
• *Attack Value: 3 in the 1st round, 2 in the 2nd round, and 1 in the third and later rounds.
• *Movement: this unit may move as if it were a plane unit with a move of 2 and the exception of no requirement for return movement.
• *Cost: This is a unit upgrade instead of a new unit. The upgrade costs 1 IPC but requires an available Infantry unit to recieve said upgrade.
• Airborne Infantry may also be boosted by artillery and tanks, in the same manner as normal Infantry.

These would be rules for an airborne infantry / paratroopers unit that can’t be used at the beginning of the game, doesn’t use plane pieces to move around, can’t be used willy-nilly, and can be used as a mobile strategic reserve for either attack or defense.

I think that this would have a greater “rules overhead” than simply using transport plane units to move airborne infantry units around. I also think that this is closer to what I think was your original idea for paratroopers, upthread.

My 2 IPCs,

-Midnight_Reaper

@Eisenhower Off-topic, but Eisenhower you really should claim your prize: 20th Anniversary Give Away, Winners for October 23, 2030. It’s yours for the taking…

-Midnight_Reaper

@Navalland said in Which is the best sea unit?:

In my game 1 plane can only have 1/6 chance to be shot down against any fleet composition.

That’s 1 plane. If 3 planes attack, is each one subject to AA fire? If so, then the defender as 3/6 odds (more or less) of downing one of those attackers.

That is the heart of GEN Manstein is discussing, I believe.

-Midnight_Reaper

With the benefit of mulling all of this over last night into this morning, I hope you find these new critiques of mine to be helpful.

@Imperious-Leader said in 1942.2 House Rules Draft 1.1:

1942.2-- House Rules
New Units:
Light Tanks: 2-2-2 costing 5 ipc

I would ask that you consider applying the “Cavalry Withdrawal” rules that Ralph Boerke dreamed up in the '90s to your Light Tanks:

[Light Tank] Withdrawal: After one round of battle the Defender may withdraw one surviving Light Tank unit to any adjacent friendly territory. The Defender may continue to withdraw one surviving unit per round of battle so long as the battle continues. It is always allowed to take its defensive shot before it withdraws. If it is to withdraw, then it must do so before the Attacker starts the next round of battle.

This rule would help your Light Tanks work more like armored scouts, in my opinion. Whether you want your Light Tanks to work that way and whether the above rule is how you would do so is certainly up to you.

Fortifications: May be built at the cost of 3 ipc for the first level and 2 ipc each additional level and limit on build to the IPC of the territory (example: France at full capacity will be 6 levels costing 12 ipc.)

If the first level of a fortification costs 3 IPCs, wouldn’t fortifying France to six levels cost 13 IPCs?

Also, is there a limit on how quickly a territory can be fortified? Say, only 1 or 2 levels of fortification per territory per turn? In real life, the Atlantic Wall wasn’t built in just 3 months.

Technology:
Super Subs: Your subs now defend at 2, costing 7. Instead of combat and while adjacent to an enemy territory may perform an economic disruption attack by rolling two or less and if succeed, they cost the player 1 ipc. The attacks are capped by the ipc value of the area.

If your Super Subs have a different defense value and a different cost, should they be distinguished in some fashion from your regular subs? Perhaps with a special marker (maybe using HBG’s Sub Propulsion Markers) as opposed to a dedicated piece?

Heavy Bombers: 4-2-6 costing 15 ipc. These can SBR with a bonus of +2 ipc lost for each successful bombing run.

Again, if your Heavy Bombers have a different cost, a different defense value, and different SBR damage, should they be distinguished in some fashion from your regular bombers?

Jet Fighters: 4-5-4 costing 15. These units can

This rule appears to have not fully joined us today. Also, differing values and price, should they be distinguished as well?

Other Rules:
Setup Changes: Under LHTR “Gen Con Setup” Move the German Bomber to France.

Does this mean that your rule set uses the LHTR “Gen Con Setup” for setup other than the above listed change?

Also, there are a number of places where you designate that players, “Cannot have more than 6”, of a certain type of unit at any one time. While I have no problems with piece limits in general or with a limit of 6, I would consider lowering the limit to 5. I suggest 5 instead of 6 not for game balance but because HBG sells markers and pieces in sets of 5 instead of 6.

Players encouraged to maximize their opportunities may have to choose between buying too many or having too few of something when the limit is 6. I acknowledge that 6 sets of 5, split 5 ways, give all player 6 markers each. I would also point out that if players purchase nation-specific pieces, they would be back to having to choose between 5 and 10 for 6. I will concede that if you are buying sets of nation-specific pieces or markers for your A&A gaming then you might consider buying 10 of something anyways.

My 2 IPCs,

-Midnight_Reaper

I think that so far, so good, for your proposed rules. I really like some of these ideas. I really appreciate the way these rules provide more options for each player.

That said, I will again beat the drum against the idea of using bombers as planes for paratroopers to jump out of. WWII paratroopers did not jump out of any strategic bombers and the planes that WWII paratroopers did jump out of were never used as strategic bombers during the war.

I find this way of thinking especially pernicious as there are readily-available alternatives. On HBG alone you can find acrylic markers for Airfields, two different WWII aircraft in white (for use by any power) (yes, one option would be a re-purposed bomber), and nation-specific WWII transport aircraft (C-46 Commandos (for ANZAC, France, UK, and USA), Ju-52 Iron Annies (for Germany and Italy), Ki-57 Topsy’s (for Japan), and Yak-6s (for USSR)).

So, as for those HBG acrylic Airfield markers, I was thinking that you could use them in conjunction with the Axis & Allies Global 1940 Second Edition rules for the “Paratrooper” technology. And for refresher, those rules are:

“Up to 2 of your infantry units in each territory with an air base can be moved to an enemy-controlled territory 3 or fewer spaces away that is being attacked by your land units from adjacent territories and/or by amphibious assault. When moving, paratroopers must obey the same restrictions that air units do. If the territory being attacked has AAA (antiaircraft artillery) units, the paratrooper infantry units are subject to antiaircraft fire in the same way as air units. If attacking along with land units from adjacent territories, paratroopers may retreat as normal.” (Source: Axis & Allies Europe 1940, Second Edition, Rule book, page 40.)

I would allow players to either buy them permanently (and get all the bonuses attached to them in Global '40) or pay 5 IPCs to get the use of up to 2 infantry as notated in the Global '40 rules above.

The transport planes (either the neutral white ones or the nation-specific models) could be used either way - permanently, for better or worse, or pay 5 IPCs to get the use of up to 2 infantry as notated in the Global '40 rules above.

I’m just saying, we have options for moving airborne infantry around that don’t use the wrong type of places.

-Midnight_Reaper

One fellow member of axisandallies.org, vodot, has been known to spin a model or two. Perhaps he can help you out. An example of some of his work is available here as well.

-Midnight_Reaper

One color that some gamers have used for Canadian units comes from the old A&A Revised game. When that game was first released, the UK’s units were in a shade of green, lighter than what the US’s pieces were in. This color is sometimes referred to as seafoam green, sometimes as celery green. See below:

UK pieces in light/celery green, picture 1 (source: https://boardgamegeek.com/image/76919/axis-allies)

UK pieces in light/celery green, picture 2 (source: https://boardgamegeek.com/image/88496/axis-allies)

UK pieces in light/celery green, shown with in mass with pieces from other powers in mass (source: https://boardgamegeek.com/image/72417/axis-allies)

The same UK pieces in tan, to show the difference (source: https://boardgamegeek.com/image/1006268/axis-allies)

While “official” A&A pieces in this color were only made for the Revised version of the game (and not all of the Revised games came with green Brits, only the earlier editions), new pieces in (roughly) this color is available from Historical Board Gaming (HBG). Sort their battle pieces by color, and take a gander at what is available in what HBG calls celery green. You can also buy some of the old A&A Revised pieces in celery green, but it’s not cheap.

I hope that helps.

-Midnight_Reaper

Global 1940 IS the combination of Europe 1940 and Pacific 1940. So, yes, as I previously stated, the first editions and the second editions of the games that make up Axis & Allies 1940 Global have compatible chip types.

I know this because I own both the first editions of Europe 1940 and Pacific 1940 and the second editions of Europe 1940 and Pacific 1940, therefore causing me to own the first and second editions of Axis & Allies Global 1940.

I said, Good Day, Sir.

-Midnight_Reaper

For the combinations of Europe 1940 and Pacific 1940, first editions and Europe 1940 and Pacific 1940, second editions - yes.

For the combination of 1942, first edition and 1942, second edition - no.

The difference betwixt the 1940 compatibility and the 1942 incompatibility may be what lead you to ask, in my opinion.

-Midnight_Reaper

@Eisenhower Which game are you asking about? Different games of Axis & Allies will yield different answers to your question.

-Midnight_Reaper

What third guide, you only list two…

-Midnight_Reaper

The Axis has a swift, decisive game plan - take away enough of the Allies territory before the Allies can mobilize their greater resources to smash in the might of the Axis.

The Allies play a long game - keep just enough territory to turn time and resources into a military mighty enough to smash the Axis to bits.

The players most capable of carrying out their side’s strategy should win (baring odd dice results, of course).

My 2 IPCs,

-Midnight_Reaper

I’ve heard people talk about doing this but I’ve never seen anything concrete. You would have to adapt the zombie cards to the territories in Anniversary. With those new cards and some zombies (you will likely need twice the zombies that come in A&A&Z) you should be good to go.

-Midnight_Reaper

@trulpen said in Tutor game: AndrewAAGamer (X) vs trulpen [and everyone else] (A+50) OOB:

Maybe it’s possible to do both a and b?

If you do both of these, how will your setup be long term? Can you sustain both offensives after this turn?

-Midnight_Reaper

@Brownjigga36 My most played version is the same as yours, the old Milton Bradley copy. While it’s a long story about how the ole’ big box isn’t the original version, almost nobody ever played A&A before Milton Bradley made it famous anyways.

And while I’ve managed to collect all the versions, I’ve only managed to get in plays of A&A 1941 and A&A, 1942, Second Ed, otherwise.

I hope that no matter which version you play, you have a great time doing so.

-Midnight_Reaper

Thanks for stopping by! Are you still playing the version you bought way back when or have you moved to one of the more recent varieties?

-Midnight_Reaper

I don’t know how much you’re willing to pay, but if you can find it for its original price ($50) then you are doing well. I know of two places to look: BoardGameGeek (BGG) and eBay.

As of today (20200919):

BoardGameGeek has two available, $150 in the US, Euro 85 in France.

eBay has one available, $190 in the US.

I hope that helps.

-Midnight_Reaper