Posts made by Narvik

@General:

On a side note I do feel Germany should be rewarded for Russian conquest by having Turkey and Spain ally with them since they were on the fence to begin with.

I believe that neutrals are likely to join the stronger power, and not the loosing one. Its opposite in A&A games because of balance. If you occupy a true neutral in this game, all the neutrals in the world will turn against you. This is a design to script the game to follow a historical correct path. Every WWII games have this flaw. But the real war was different. After Germany crushed neutral Poland, all the minor neutrals like Finland, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia etc joined the strong Germany. Not one minor would go to war against the strong Germany at that time. But after Russia had proved to be stronger than Germany, all the former German allies mentioned above, switched side and went to war against Germany. Major neutrals like Sweden, Spain and Turkey made trade agreements with the strong Germany after Poland got crushed,  but after Germany lost at Stalingrad they all switched side, and started to support the by now stronger Allies.

But how to implement realistic rules into A&A ? Maybe ditch the 5 IPC NOs Germany get after capturing Russian cities, and rather give them the IPC income from the true neutrals, representing trade agreements. And when the tide turn, let the Allies get the trade income from the neutrals. After all, the NO was designed to make a short game, so it doesn’t matter from where they take the IPC.

@coachofmany:

The beautifully recolored map features a host of new territories and terrain
features - a completely historically accurate landscape.  Â

So, you say the map will have terrain like mountains and marshes that effect the combat value ? Are the rules finished, or are you open for suggestions ?

@SS:

I was just lookin to get 40 games but Never had a chance to bid.

You can still get the map,

@questioneer:

rehashing something made 30 years ago.Â

This feels like kicking a dead horse, but if we ditch A&A because it was invented 30 years ago, what about chess, poker, backgammon etc

@EnoughSaid:

1. "Blockhouse Fortification 0/3/0/8 1940+ "
It’s horrendously overpriced. Why would anyone buy that instead of 4 Whermacht Infantry? It needs an extra ability, such as the ability to soak hits (several, at that price) like capital ships.

No, you should not buy that Blockhouse if you want to win the game.

What is a Blockhouse ? Infantry + a concrete bunker ? In that case it should cost 3 IPC + 1 IPC for the concrete, a total of 4 IPC, and defend on 2, and take two hits to kill. The whole idea with a bunker is protection. All units that are protected by armor or concrete are hard targets that absorb hits, or negate hits.

And what is a Fortification ? Is it a heavy artillery gun in a casemate ? In that case it cost 4 IPC for the gun + 1 IPC for the concrete, a total of 5 IPC. I think it should defend on 3 or less, and for sure take two hits to kill.

Ooops, forgot to add a pic of the HBG Atlantic Wall fortifications and the Blockhouses from D-day

@Linkon:

It stunned the world that a superpower such as France (at the time) would fall to a crazy person like Hitler.

I guess the French soldier did not want to die for Danzig. Poland was not a nice guy in the 30s, it was a Dictatorship that stole land from all its neighbors, a bit of Ukraine, a bit of Belorussia, a bit of the Baltic, a bit from Slovakia, from Rumenia, and a big slice of Germany. And now, Germany wanted to take Danzig back, and the French government forgot to ask the Frenchmen if they would like to die for this. Now if your government send you to the meat grinder for a cause you don’t agree with, I bet you stick em up pretty quick.

Anyway

Maybe this thread should be in the “Axis and Allies News” forum ?

Thanks for input, knp7765. I am brainstorming, so noting is carved in stone yet.

Yes, so far I just cover Europe. I live in Europe so that’s the game my group usually play, that or 42. Don’t think we have finished a game of Global 40 yet, takes too much time.

So far this idea is more theory than playability. Since its a house rule, every group are free to play it the way they want. I figure a decent Commander can reroll in every round of combat, not just the first. Maybe the Allied Commanders should reroll in the first round only, since they use a rigid tactic, and after the first meeting with the enemy their plans turn to chaos. But the Germans used the Mission Tactics (Auftragstaktik) where even low leaders at company, battalion and Division levels would take initiative on their own, and don’t sit and wait for orders from above. If a Russian leader would take initiative, then Stalin would send him to GULag, so the Russian tactic was different, no finesse, only human waves. And Zhukov was only successful when he was far away from Stalin, like in the Battle of Khalkin Gol in the far east, or in Leningrad.

If you look at the TDI reports at Dupuy Institute, you will see that for every German soldier, it would take 10 Russians, 3 Brits or 2 Americans. Obviously the German training, skills, tactic and leadership were superior to the Allies. Its two ways to model this, either give German units higher combat values, or give Germany Commanders that can reroll misses. I prefer the last choice.

Monty did not make the list. He did too many mistakes. He did well only against the Italians, but they score even lower than the Russians on the TDI reports from DI.

Yes, then we have the Moscow stack. Lets say Germany attack with 70 units against 60 units. If both stacks got a Commander each, they will balance each other, and the outcome will be the same. The only advantage with Commander units in this case, is faster resolving of the Battle. Lets say you use 10 dice. You roll for 10 units at a time, and with a Commander you do the reroll immediately, saving time. Now you will have less units left after the first round of combat, and the extra time spending is barely noticeable.

@crusaderiv:

2. French Fighting Spirit. French infantry that survived the first round of combat, will surrender before the next round

I can’t see where is the advantage??!!! :-D

The advantage to France is, it saves lives. Now that’s a big deal to the French

@EnoughSaid:

A thought to consider on the commander units:
This game already heavily rewards “stacking” units. Adding this unit increases that incentive even more so.

I mean to be pointing this out from a neutral perspective.

Thanks, this is exactly the kind of feedback I want. I hope to playtest it during the upcoming holidays. I have seen threads about this HR now and then, and would like info from playtests, if any have been done.

I see your point about stacking, but am not sure that will happen before it is playtest big time. I believe the Moscow stack happens because Moscow is a decisive point. If you want to remove the incentive to stack, you must change the Capture of Capital rules.

FRENCH NATIONAL ADVANTAGE

1. The Maginot Line. France start with 4 Fortress units on the German border.

Fortress unit. Cost 10 IPC. Defend on 4 or less. Take two hits to kill

2. French Fighting Spirit. French infantry that survived the first round of combat, will surrender before the next round

COMMANDER UNIT

The Commander unit is supposed to model very skilled and successful Field Marshals and Fleet Admirals, that got the ability to turn battles to their favor. For any game purpose, a Commander that is present in a territory or seazone, can reroll all misses, both in attack and defence. If your Tanks, Inf, Art and Tacs in Ukraine roll a total of 5 hits and 9 misses, then a present Commander can reroll the 9 misses.

Only one Commander can use his reroll ability in a specific territory. If Germany have 5 Commander units in Poland, only one of them can reroll misses. The others are considered being on vacation.

The great military powers start with a set numbers of Commanders, and it is not possible to purchase any more during play. But a Commander can be removed from play if all units in his territory or seazone are killed.

Germany start with 6 Commanders. They got the best military commanders of the world at that time.

USA start with 3 Commanders.

Russia start with 1 Commander. Stalin had purged the rest of them.

UK is recognized as a great Sea Power and start with 1 Fleet Admiral.

US LEND LEASE

1. USA purchase one or more Convoy units. This unit cost USA 7 IPC to purchase, but the receiver only cash out 5 IPC. The missing 3 IPC is for shipping.

2. The Convoy unit represent civilian merchantmen and cargo ships that USA hire to ship the stuff to UK or Russia. The Convoy unit move 2 spaces, and can be sunk like any other ship. It has no combat value.

3. When the Convoy unit finally reach its destination, the receiver cash in 5 IPC and remove the unit from play. When the LL goods are delivered, the Merchantmen are supposed to join the international trade again, and are no longer part of the game.

Please do share, don’t make this just another Teaser.

@Baron:

But, in Naval situation, both fleet are at the same range from each other. Attacking TacBs and Fgs need the same time to reach the other fleet.

Strong and valid point.

Lets say Fighters and Tacs lose one combat point for every space they combatmove .

Lets say a general Fighter A3 D3.

One landbased attacking Fighter must combat move 2 spaces to the Battlezone, and lose 2 points. This Fighter attack on a 1.
One Carrierbased attacking Fighter get brought to the Battlezone by the Carrier, and attack with full strength, a 3 or less.

One defending Fighter that was based on a Carrier in the Battlezone defend on full value, which is 3 or less.
An additional defending Fighter that scrambled from an adjacent island, lose 1 point, and defend at 2 or less.

How about that, to much to keep track off ?

@Baron:

So Tank now can get A4 or D4 while a matching TcB get also D4.
You give the bonus to Tank instead of giving it to Tactical B.
And this bonus is also available for defense.
So there is no more attack bonus for Tactical B paired with a Fighter?

What was the reasons behind all this little changes?

The reason is I want house rules that are historical correct and make sense. It makes no sense to bonus an aircraft attack if Tanks promise to attack the next day. I imagine that Tacs will bomb the enemy before the Tanks show up. Because it makes no sense to me if Tanks attack first, and capture the ground, and next day the planes come to bomb the POW camps. So lets agree that aircrafts will strafe the enemy before the Tanks come and join the battle. In fact, the Tanks join the battle after the planes are finished bombing and gone. At the moment planes are strafing, the defenders have a set combat value. After being strafed, this value is less, the defenders have been softened, giving the expecting Tanks an easier job and better change of success. Even if the planes miss, and the defender survives, the strafing demoralized them and softened them, giving the Tanks a big advantage and bonus when they attack the next day. So, the initial aircraft attack do not get any advantage from a Tank attack that has not yet happened. But, Tanks get a big advantage if planes strafed and softened the enemy before they attack. The bonus should be given to the unit that follow up, and exploit the situation. Not the opener.

In OOB fighters boost Tacs because there are no opening air to air dogfight. My houserules got a dogfight before the general combat, and all Tacs that survived that dogfight are now free to channel all their effort towards the ground units, and don’t have to bother about fighters. That part is done.

@Flashman:

German tank advantage shouldn’t apply vs USSR. The KV tanks were almost invulnerable to German shells before the Panther and Tiger were introduced, so give the Soviets the 2 hit point advantage also.

You are misunderstanding. The 2 hit advantage has nothing to do with Heavy Tanks, armor or shells. Tanks are not Battleships. Its the Blitzkrieg doctrine, with fast surprise attacks and Tanks making shock waves. The Russian KV Tanks did not earn a 2 hit advantage during the Finnish Winter war, nor in the Spanish Civil war of 1936. You need to understand that this rule is not about individual Tanks, its about Panzer Divisions and Armor Corps of hundred thousand men and thousand Tanks. At this scale, a German Panzer Korps took less casualties than the defender, because their Mission Tactics, surprise attacks and Blitzing would absorb enemy hits. Simple as that.

@Flashman:

Not sure about the Soviets retreating; Stalin ordered any Russian soldier who retreated to be shot.

You are only partly correct. Stalins famous Order Nr. 227, which told retreating soldiers must be shot, was written in July 28 1942, one year after the attack on Russia. If you look at a situation map from that date, you will see that the Red Army had stopped the trading of land for time, and now were headed west to Berlin.

Stalins first order after the German attack was the Scorched Earth Order, and before August, just one month after the attack, he had established more than 1 700 Destruction Battalions to burn down and blow up everything the Red Army left behind. This was a typical Russian military response to an attack. Stalin also wrote Order Nr. 270 in August 16 1941, which instructed officers to not retreat without order. Stalin wanted the retreat to be as slow as possible, and he wanted encircled units to not surrender, but slow down the Germans.

In light of this, my house rule suggestion still stand firm IMHO, love discussing with you though

@SS:

With this new lend lease rule US can send any transport from either coast? So if the whole fleet in Pacific escorts a transport from San Fran towards FEC and Japan has to decide to wether they want to attack the whole US fleet to kill transport or decides to let it go and now US is off the coast of India. So Japan can now kill the US fleet without going to war.
The movement is going to be key. It will change the game now with US ships everywhere.

Why in the name of Santa would USA send the whole T1 Fleet to India, just to get it sunk there ?