Posts made by Rank Carcass

For explanation I’ll provide some numbers baron. Though your idea may be a good one for me to test out.
Power / Current wartime incomes / adjusted income (bonus removed)
Germany /20/40 =doubled or would be 25 (14)
Japan /16/33 (19)
Italy /10/21 (6)
Axis total / 46/94 (39)

Great Britain /24/69 (5)
FEC /14/27 (2)
French /17/45 (3)
Dutch /12/23 (0)
ANZAC / 8/17 (2)
KMT China /6/11 (1)
US /63/93 (13)
Allies total /144/285 (26)

USSR / 46/103 (20)
CCP China /2/3 (1)
Cominturn total /48/106 (21)

Should germany take everything in continental Europe it swings up 67. Vichy is also 2-32.
This brings dutch down 2, france down 15 and possibly 0-30 more depending upon Vichy rolls. Ill provide new totals for germany vs Allies and Cominturn , assuming rest of axis neutral.
Axis 161-191
Allies 268-238
Cominturn 106
Considering these numbers ill need to play test. Comunist is free to attack allies in our games.

HBG has confirmed this. And will have it corrected in future updated US sheets.

[HBG 1936] income increase for zero territories or islands house rule.

Looking for some experience with this from other variations. There is a bit of this I have found, thanks to the house rule stickies.
 Any input welcome!

My goal is to eliminate the use of history scripting income bonuses, and increase the purchasing power of all powers. Realy looking to encourage SBR, interception, and increasing the play and value of ofter ignored areas on the map in Southern Hemisphere. Without breaking game balance. We have the luxury to keep the game setup for months. We play till surrender, victory scores are only to find who lost most.

The only bonus income left would be from treaties of non aggression pacts, or military expansion.
I’ve found 3 ways to accomplish this but I’m not sure what will work best.

1. Add one income to every land zone in the game. (340 land zones). Benefit given to all geographic areas most needed in the European area. Few zero land zones present. Keeping economic par with new income from africa etc. Retains the KISS idea simply add 1 income to everything.

2. Add one income to all zero income land zones. (157 land zones). Solves 1 problem but mostly affects russia, africa and islands in atlantic or pacific. Double bonus to allies minor change for axis. Breaking balance.

3. A combination of the other 2 looking for balance, targeting specific geographic locations like the Pacific Islands. Difficult to get a concensus on the best locations to select. May work best but will require constantly adjusting and play testing.

Only other thing that I think will be affected by this is, income increases to US and Russia. May need to be more than a d12 per turn.

Ill be play testing a variation of option 1 and 3. The only deviation from +1 income to every land zone was in Germany. Germany having only 5 zones was too far behind France or British. So its income was doubled on all land zones retaining the parity. All national economic bonuses are the same for peace time. All wartime bonuses are removed unless part of a nonaggression pact. Since the US and USSR wartime incomes are nearly doubled they will roll 2×D12 rather than one D12 per turn for income increase.

I’m in the process of expanding income on the map [HBG 1936]. Eliminating all zero IPP land zones or just Pacific islands. Currently not 100% on the exact mechanism to achieve this and not ruin the ballance. I’m searching house rules forum for ideas that are tested at the moment…

However I have discovered a discrepancy on the US income during this process.
US National Reference Sheet: wartime income/value of territories = 56 IPP.

I just triple checked my math again…  and find the above sheet’s quote to be false.
Total US territories=30
US territories with zero value=6
Added up the face value of US territories with roundel on 1936 map=63
Eastern Us map side=43 IPP and Western US map side=20

Feel free to contest this. It’s entirely possible I’ve made a mistake. Or have a different version of map/national sheets, if that’s a possibility I’d want to know it!

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38414.0

Has a few ideas I used for this exact issue. I’ve changed a few things since with the chips colours. It was a bit overwhelming at first.

Though over time I’ve started to buy or make some pieces to replace these chips from hbg. Occasionally they are out of stock on some stuff.  Some we used often and others we didn’t bother with. Torpedo boat destroyers for example were not worth it for us we just switched to destroyers for these at setup. For now….

HBG says you can play with global40 oob pieces. But a few items are nice to have extra.

Found it way cheaper to buy some units from hbg. The pieces from Pacific or Europe 40. Some are sold in a complete bag for a nation uk and usa most likely in stock. And spray paint any extra colours you want. Dutch orange, yellow comunist china and spain to augment the special units in the same colours i bought.

If money isn’t an issue I’d say call or email the folks at HBG and get everything you need there. They know their stuff and can assist you with the pieces and options required. Have had lots of communication with them. They are very good at getting back to you and assisting with your orders!

SS
Yeah, Ill try it out your way. Always liked painted pieces bold solid colours need to stand out from the rest. Much easier to ID by type or country. Tried the fancy painting stuff, but without decals players are easily confused as to whose/what pieces they are. And then need a chart to explain it.

@Ichabod:

Yes.

Also, I’m curious, were you or are you in the military?

No military service for me, unless you count a year in the reserves 20 years ago, no deployment lol. But I work with a guy that was artillery for 10+ years, as per him. Unless its a built in like the WW1 style Maginot line type stuff AAA and arty were moved and used the same, lots of AAA were actually smaller and more portable like the one referenced from saving private Ryan movie. The same Artillery unit was assigned both of these types of artillery for Canada anyway. Stands to reason other countries would be similar. My wife’s Grandfather was in Canadian artillery in WW2 and assigned to an Anti-Aircraft battery for part of his time, rest was standard artillery in Europe 1939-1946.

GHG
Is correct on the aircraft disappearance rates, tried that as a house rule. Brutally expensive!
HBG 1936 rules regarding fighter air superiority round (first round all fighter hits are assigned to aircraft if available), isn’t as bad for this. But can be advantageous to scramble fighters. Just to take out carrier aircraft, even though you are bound to lose the battle.
page 39 and 54, same as quote on Anti-aircraft.

SS
Good idea on facility AAA pieces, will give me something to use my old AAA units from pacific and original games. but may make strategic bombing too easy, or expensive to defend. have you given this a trial run?

We have used HBG 1936 AAA rules in global1940 as HR. Works great! We found defence only AAA was illogical. Most AAA were in reality towed by vehicle identical to conventional artillery. If it can move and defend why not also attack?

HR we use, inspired by 1936 rules, modified for 1940 global:

1. AAA unit can only fire on aircraft, both attack or defense. Maximum of 3 shots @ 1 d6, first round of combat only. One shot at each plane per AAA to a maximum of 3 planes shot per each AAA. Casualties caused selected by owner. AAA may be selected as casualties. A1/D1/M1/C oob.

2. All facilities have built in AAA. Used only to defend strategic bombing of that facility, not depicted as a unit.

3. AAA unit piece does not participate in defense of strategic bombing of facilities. Only used to defend unit pieces (inf. Etc.) Or attack with other units in a land zone only. Same as oob artillery, in all movement, including naval transportation. Only used in land zone AAA is located in.

Well written thank you Jinx!
Think that covers it in detail. Its boring to sit neutral as Italy. However the ability to halt allied troop and naval movement is priceless. And the other players sighs and counter builds are rather good entertainment.

Italy is small, but used right can punch over its weight.

@SS:

HBG  site

:? :-o :?
HGB site has an FAQ regarding rules clarification only. No different than Avalon Hill regarding official A&A games. They both have no forum to discuss strategies or house rules.

Jinx1527 started the topic. Life has obviously interupted. Hopefully we will see this strategy in the future.

I can only speculate that the strategy involves the use of the italian troops, navy and port from Italian Somalia in East Africa.  Either to attack South Africa, Cairo from both sides. Or become a can opener for Japan against FEC in the Indian Ocean. Due to the nature of the first post. I would say its possibly similar to something I like to do, reinforcing this area to cause the British Empire to hesitate moving troops up from south africa or towards Japan simply by having this potential Italian threat in the background. Threat Projection: Even if Italy is still neutral. Then pounce on the weakest available target. Because you never know when Italy will declare war…

Thank you both! Mr tricorder and dillankid
Thats perfect info! :-D
Lots of threads on other’s project maps. But precious few,  on how to DIY a map,  player aids etc. The more you know, the fewer mistakes explained for you to repeat.

Boones is closest to any type of wine selection.  :?

Though rediculously far away from the Portuguese 6 grapes port I drink.
You get good n ripped sipping at this delicious fortified wine… similar to wiskey and ice.

A sweet honey wine I make that tastes like Boones sweetness, with a extra level of kick. Is another option that can, possibly convert a few to the “Boones” vote  :-D

You get some interesting wiggle room on this one. Depending upon the unit and whether you want it to be purchased more, or less. Inf attack at 2 probably regular purchase frequency, but Inf attack at 3 is better stats than before. You may find that there are many more Infantry on the board!
This would be advantageous for increasing the purchase of some often ignored units, by bumping up the cruiser to 7 not 6. You will probably need to play test and figure it out.
Additionally you could incorporate new units such as this example: Tank Destroyer between mech and tank in a more natural way.

100% would like to see these! Would be fun to incorporate into a classic game.

Bgugs Thanks for starting this thread. Answered the questions I had. Thanks also to the community for its helpful answers.
But now that I’ve started…downloaded inkscape and gimp.
Does anyone know what the recommendation resolution needs to be? Specifically for larger map sizes like 4feet by 8 feet, or another common sized map at 3feet by 6feet. I would like it to have the same crisp image as either HBG 1936 or A&A global 1940. Since a digital cameras starting resolution affects larger images drastically, I assume the same here. I’d rather not pay to print a substandard large map, just to toss it and print again!

Similar to countering a mainly carrier navy with subs. Subs only target the carrier not the planes, and at a cheaper cost. I’ve thrown a stack of cheap German/Japanese  subs away, just to kill the american carrier fleet. Planes may all survive but not their carriers. Changes what you need to defend later. I can see this increasing the purchases of cheaper armored units to counter TD stacks. Just as we now never use carriers without a large naval destroyer/sub stack for defense.

Definitely a worthwhile expense for Russia if a German tank stack is knocking, to buy a bunch of tank destroyers. Better on defense than tanks but not ideal for an attack. I’d probably be purchasing these instead of just infantry for defense. May help reduce the rediculous amount of infantry in Russia.

Costs more than self propelled artillery on attack, minus the first strike. But better for multiple rounds and has target selection. I’ve found the target selection in tac aircraft to be surprisingly helpful if you have 5 or more units. Probably the same with the TD against tanks.

Yeah since you brought it up im definitely motivated to use these units. Guess I’ll be buying a stack of white units and painting to match the missing HBG colours. Funny how fast my piece addiction kicks in. Its the jet fighter and heavy tanks all over again lol. Probably the light tanks too so I dont lose expensive armour against these TD.  Ahh guess im working overtime again, for this obsession of a game.

Rail gun and armoured train from the expansion, Fighting railways. Had to give everyone a write up on new units. We were constantly looking for stats n costs.

We don’t have any tank destroyers yet. After the annoyances of multiple stat sheets for units. We will not incorporate any new units till the new sheets are out. However I believe I would perchase a few of these. For a dollar more than mech. Its not able to blitz but has the target select and increased attack. Mixed stacks always work better for me. They are harder to counter unit wise. It will not replace any perchases I make unless I’m looking to countering a mainly tank army. The unit stats from your first post seem reasonable, but I’ve never used it.

Recomend you ask this in house rules or customization threads. You will have more traffic. Mostly just global players here, this question is applicable to any game. Although its easier to fit into a d12 system than d6.

HBG sounds like they are making a master unit sheet. I had asked them if they were adding their new units to national reference sheets. They said its in the works. I cant get our group to add new units unless its in the game. Adding railway expansion was complicated by new pages for unit values.

Munck
Excellent idea! Funny how obvious that is.
Looking forward to seeing thosr changes.

Narvik
100% agreement with the scripting. We are slowly trying to increase the autonomy for the players. Cominturn was the most obviously needed. These are some excellent house rule options.

Your 3 spaces from friendly port is interesting. But will prevent Russia from amphibious assaults on South America/Africa. Etc. Otherwise I like it.

Have you tried this political option. Free dictators etc? I can see it may work.  Does it lead to fluid alliance changes later in the game? Betrayal and side switching.

Fully agree with neutral is neutral. Rather than pro anything!