Axis & Allies .org Forums
    • Home
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. SEP
    3. Posts
    S
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 0
    • Topics 22
    • Posts 124
    • Best 2
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 0

    Posts made by SEP

    • RE: Converting 1940 to 1942.2 (air, naval, convoy & kamikaze)

      We were discussing movement from air bases in another thread and the same concern was raised.  We were discussing it in regards to Air Transports.  The suggestion was to simply not have air bases provide the extra movement.  This is something to look at closely.

      I do like the repairing of damage that the naval base provides, and would like to also make the AC a two-hit unit.  But again may have to disregard the extra movement from them as well as the SZ’s different.  I’ve not used the scramble at all, and have only done a quick run through of the rules.  But I could see that it would affect balance because of the different SZ set up.

      In regards to the set up of tactical bombers and mech infantry Baron Munchhausen offered this:

      @Baron:

      I always plays 1942.2 with these units.
      Mechanized Infantry can be buy on first round.
      I don’t place any on the set-up.

      About Tactical on the set-up, I split the 6 planes for Germany and Japan into 3 Fgs and 3 TcBs.
      I change 2 Fgs for 2 TcBs with UK.
      1 Russian Fg for 1 TcB.
      With USA, I usually change 2 Fgs for 2 TcBs.

      However, I know that Oztea has made a few set-up with these units also.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • Tampa, Florida

      Currently playing 1942.2 with some of the 1940 rules/units.

      I also play Star Fleet Battles.

      Wouldn’t mind getting some sort of regular gaming group together.

      posted in Player Locator
      S
      SEP
    • Converting 1940 to 1942.2 (air, naval, convoy & kamikaze)

      As I’ve mentioned in some other threads, I’ve recently bought 1942.2.  We are enjoying it thoroughly and would like to add elements from the 1940 global game.  Specifically I purchased tactical bombers and mech infantry and have air, naval, convoy and kamikaze counters on the way.

      In using the air, naval, convoy and kamikaze counters I’ve had to convert from the 1940 global map to the 1942.2 map.  I’ve done so as closely as possible I think.  I’d like to list the conversions here and if anyone spots any glaring errors or oversights please shout out.

      In regards to air/naval bases:

      Germany:

      Germany - air/naval
      Italy - air/naval 
      France - air naval

      Russia:

      Russia - air/naval
      Karelia - naval

      **Great Britain: **

      U.K. - air/naval
      Iceland - air/naval
      E. Canada - naval
      Gibraltar - naval
      Egypt - naval
      S. Africa - naval
      E. Australia - air/naval
      New Zealand - air/naval
      India - air/naval
      Malaya - naval

      Japan:

      Japan - air/naval
      Caroline Islands - air/naval
      Phillipine Islands - air/naval
      Wake - air

      U.S.

      E. United States - air/naval
      W. United States - air/naval
      Hawaiian Islands - naval
      Midway - air

      As far as convoy routes:

      SZ 3,7,8,10,11,15,17,18,22,24,28,33,34,35,36,37,39,40,45,47,48,49,53,56,60,61,62,65.

      As far as Kamikaze SZ:

      48,51,52,59,60,61,62.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Special weapons or other?

      @knp7765:

      1942.2 did not come with the Weapons Development because they had that in Global and Anniversary and they wanted 1942 (both editions) to be a simpler game. However, I’m sure you can easily bring the weapons development into that game. You would just need your own chart to keep track of them.

      It will be easy enough.  I printed out the development chart and glued it to a cardboard backer.  Same with the 1940 battle chart.

      Also, if you get a chance to get a copy of the rulebook from Revised, they have a neat optional rule called National Advantages. These are unique to each country and might give them a slight edge in certain situations. Each nation (just the big 5) gets 6 different advantages to choose from and you can use none, any or all of them. Some advantages are a one time use while others continue throughout the game. It’s a pretty neat thing to add a little flavor to your game.

      I glanced at that and may have to take a closer look at it.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      @knp7765:

      Yeah, I was figuring that if they were allowed to double their capacity, then they would need the logistical support of a working air base. If they just take one infantry, then they can drop him off in a dusty field.
      Same thing with paratroopers. Since it is a combat move, I think they would need to start off at an air base but once they dropped the paratroops, they could land in any friendly territory. Of course, if they want to do another paratroop drop, it would have to wait until they got back to an air base unless you happened to buy an air base that round and place it in the territory that the transport plane landed in.
      We also allow paratroops to be dropped in enemy controlled unoccupied territories. A “behind the front lines” sort of thing. This kind of makes for a sort of infantry blitz tactic. This would be a good way of preventing enemy retreats but if your attack on the front line territory fails, then that paratroop will probably be wiped out on your enemy’s next turn.

      I think allowing them to be dropped into an unoccupied enemy territory as a combat move is one of their main attractions.  This means that the attacker needs to be looking for the possibility as well as defenders making sure it doesn’t happen.  Adds a tactical twist.

      I’ve been wondering if we should make capital territories exempt from paratroop drops.

      Perhaps if the capital is unoccupied it could be exempt.  But if it is occupied I see no reason it couldn’t be allowed.  More than likely it would be part of a larger attack so it allows for an extra inf to be part of the battle.  I suppose one paratroop, by itself, going against one or two units in the capital is also a possibility and it is even a small possibility the dice roll in your favor and you take it with the one paratroop.  That’s really not much of a difference than a transport doing the same thing.

      I think, at least for the first few times, I’d allow it to be used against any unoccupied enemy territory including a capital.  Keeps everyone on their toes!

      Attack 1 (2 on first combat round), Defense 2, Move 1, Cost 4

      I like the idea of having paratroops as separate units from infantry.  I’ve not read all the rules for all the different editions, is this one of the rules/options?  Or is this a HR you guys use?  Either way I like it.  Paratroops are different than mainline infantry so costing 1 IPC more is reasonable.  I like the attack at a 2 on the first round as well.  Gives them a little something unique.  I would suppose that if a paratroop was dropped into a territory that you also had an artillery attacking that they would continue to attack at 2 like infantry?

      By the way, I think that is a good idea to cut the range to 5. However, they still get the extra movement boost from an air base.

      About incorporating air and naval bases into 1942.2, I think in that case you should remove the extra movement bonus for both of them. That map is quite a bit smaller than Global and has less territories and sea zones. Giving any unit an extra movement point would be overpowering.
      Air bases could still have the scramble capability and allow transports to carry paratroops on combat moves or increase their capacity on non combat moves.
      Naval bases could still repair capital ships (you might consider making carriers capital ships as well in 1942.2). I can’t think of what naval bases do besides the movement bonus and repairing capital ships. Some people like to use naval bases in conjunction with an industrial complex and say that capital ships can only be launched from a naval base, and perhaps cruisers as well. Destroyers, Submarines and Transport ships can be launched from any territory with an industrial complex and don’t need a naval base. Just an idea.
      I’ve also heard an idea of naval bases giving that sea zone some sort of extra defensive power.

      The differences between the 1940 and 1942.2 map was not something I had considered, glad you brought it up.  I will need to take a look at where the naval/air bases are on the 1940 map and make a reasonable conversion to the 1942.2 map.  I was looking at the 1940 global board, and if I counted right there are 36 convoy routes as well.  I’ll have to take a look at this along with the naval/air bases.

      I was thinking about it and at some point we may consider printing out a 1940 global map and using it instead. Of course, since I don’t have the 1940 games I don’t have France, China, Italy or the Anaz (sp?).  However, I still have my classic pieces so I could always substitute them for those countries.  Let’s see, Germany is now black so the classic grey could be Italy.  China, I would imagine, doesn’t last all that long so if there is enough contrast between the old and new Japan pieces I could use them perhaps.  Same with G.B. and France, I’ll have to see if there is enough contrast.  For Australia, perhaps if there is enough difference in the Russian pieces?  IDK, it’s a thought that might be workable.  And if I just keep the 1942.2 map as the one we use it shouldn’t be all that difficult to make a reasonable conversion in the number of air/naval/convoy spaces.

      Things to ponder  :-)

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • Free-for-all

      Disclaimer:  I don’t claim perfect balance in the following description of what we did, just some of the things we played around with.

      Back in the 80’s we played some free-for-all games using the classic version.  This had a few different variations.  As an example, if we had 5 players but wanted to try something different, we each took the normal countries but everyone started with the same amount of units (except G.B. which started with more since they had more total countries).  You could make whatever alliance you wanted AND whether or not you were true to your alliance was up to you i.e. there was some occasional back-stabbing  :-o

      If we had 3 players, one was USA, one Japan and the other either Germany or Russia so they were fairly spaced out.

      If we had only two then Germany and Japan.

      Initially it was an all out land grab of course, but there were a lot of battles going on all over the board and some titanic sea battles as well.

      Again, not claiming any sort of scientific balance, but we sure had some fun with this sort of thing.  Anyone else ever do something like this?

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Special weapons or other?

      Downloaded the 1940 Global rules and have printed out the development chart.  Leaning towards inserting this into our 1942.2 game.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      @knp7765:

      Attack 0, Defense 0, Move 6, Cost 8
      Subject to AA fire
      Can move 1 paratrooper in combat move to enemy territory and land in any friendly territory. MUST load at an air base.
      Can move 2 infantry in non-combat move to any friendly territory with an air base. MUST load at an air base.
      Can move 1 infantry in non-combat move from any friendly territory to any other friendly territory. Does NOT need an air base.
      If transport planes are in a territory that is attacked and all friendly combat units are destroyed and there are enemy combat units(s) remaining, transport planes are automatically destroyed. (same as sea transports)

      Very few have been purchased in any of our games so I am tempted to lower the price. However, the few times we have used them, they worked out pretty good.

      I like the airbase rule.  I’m going to be incorporating the air/naval base rule into our 1942.2 game as I find it an interesting addition.  So doing what you’ve proposed would be doable.  Having the ability to take that one extra infrantry (from airbase to airbase) offers an interesting twist.  We were talking about C9 but I can see C8 as reasonable considering a sea transport is C7.  Perhaps even C7 to match the transport?  Something to toss around.

      Tempted to split the range difference to R5 like we’ve been talking about though…

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      In regards to a TP being able to carry an artillery, while tempting is probably not a good idea.  A consideration would be that a TP could drop the paratroops into a hostile zone and fly back during NCM whereas they wouldn’t be able to land in that same hostile zone to drop off the artillery.  Just my initial thoughts…

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      @Der:

      I recently added airborne to our game as a regular unit. (not a tech)

      The planes are actual transport plane molds from HBG, painted each country’s color. They cost 6 IPCs, move 4 and have no attack or defense. My pricing this way is because the TP has no attack or defense, so is basically useless unless moving troops around. TPs can take hits on defense but not fire back. Capacity is 1 troop per plane. This means that to use them, you are investing in a 6 IPC plane and a 4 IPC airborne troop, so it is 10 IPC per pop to get your airborne drops going.

      These rules limit the airborne threat to shorter range targets like Crete and such, which is the historic way they were used. If you get Long Range Aircraft tech they can then go 6.

      Our TPs can also non-combat regular infantry (1 per plane) around if they are not being used otherwise.  One mission total per TP per turn.

      How’s this working out for your games?  What are your thoughts on the C9 and M5 we’re discussing?

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      @CWO:

      @SEP:

      I’ve ordered tac bombers (and mech inf) from HBG last night.  And I’ll use the classic bombers in the ATP role.  This way I’ll have a specific unit for each and no confusion.

      Alternately – or as a supplement – you could pick one or two copies of the A&A 1941 game and use its variant bombers as transport planes.  The down side, however, is that only the five main powers would get such planes in their colours, and that only two of them (the British and German bombers) would be correct design matches for their countries.

      The classic bombers should do nicely and it will give me the opportunity to give them some use.  Thinking about it, if I need extra infantry I could use the classic units as well.  Although the colors aren’t spot on, it’s close enough so that they don’t get confused for the wrong army.  And since we’re adding several of the 1940 elements/units/rules to the 1942.2 game I can use the Classic Japanese fighters for the kamakaszi fighters.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      @Baron:

      It could be as well a 9 IPCs unit, to get a 1 IPC increment:
      Air Transport 9 IPCs
      Fighter 10 IPCs
      Tactical Bomber 11 IPCs
      Strategic Bomber 12 IPCs.

      I like that line up.

      I’m leaning towards the ATP just being able to load/deliver 1 infantry unit.  That way it provides an option w/o making it OP.  And that’s about right considering a transport ship is much larger than a plane, thus it should be able to do two units and the ATP only one.

      I’ve ordered tac bombers (and mech inf) from HBG last night.  And I’ll use the classic bombers in the ATP role.  This way I’ll have a specific unit for each and no confusion.

      Good discussion.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Parts?

      Thank you for the links  :-)

      posted in Player Help
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      Also gives everyone another reason to purchase AAA guns and place them in spots you maybe normally wouldn’t before.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      @Argothair:

      I’m having trouble imagining how I would make good use of a transport plane – what kinds of situations would they be best in? I could see them being a decent way of getting some infantry from London to Africa if the Nazis control the sea lanes, but it would have to wait until next turn to make the return trip. If the transport planes had a range of 6, I could see them being useful for Pacific island-hopping or for raiding the money islands, but the range of 5 makes island-hopping very challenging unless you let transport planes land on carriers.

      1.  Makes the opponent take a hard look at how they reinforce.  If they leave a country wide open it provides the opportunity to air drop an infantry into it (behind enemy lines as it were) to capture.  Could be a mere annoyance all the way to causing a real problem.

      2.  Allows the opportunity to get a few troops closer to/in the action quicker.

      3.  Brings a whole new tactical consideration to Asia and Russia’s back door i.e. it allows Japan an opportunity as well as Russia/G.B. in reinforcing Asia differently.  Could allow the Allies an opportunity to hang on to the China territories just a bit better albiet at a cost in IPC for the Allies.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Transport planes

      @Baron:

      ATP at 8 IPCs is not too cheap.
      5 move provides more long range Non-combat move while still restrict the long distance back and forth to only 2 TTs away (as any Fgs).
      The 5 moves allows more mobility to change from 1 starting TT to another for the next turn, without getting the powerful 3 TTs back and forth of bombers.

      What was your reason for choosing C8 as opposed to 10,11 or 12?  I’m assuming you can build more than one in your game?  I like the R5 as well.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Merging 1942.2 with some 1940.2 rules/units

      @Baron:

      Young Grasshopper has made a video on YouTube  Cliffside Bunker Channel which explains clearly how it works in Global game.

      Then you should read my thread on Convoy Disruption for 1942.2.
      There is two mechanics invented to try.

      Thanks again, took a look at YG’s YT channel and found the explanation for CD.  That clears it up nicely and now we can add that to the game as well.  Should be quite interesting to add this tactic.  He mentioned that it’s the responsibility of the player to point out to the other players where he can be CD’d.  Only thing I don’t necessarily agree with.  Should be the other person’s responsibility to keep an eye on the board for when/where they can CD.  Other than that it looks pretty straight forward now that I’ve seen it explained.

      Taking a look at your thread as well.  :-)

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Merging 1942.2 with some 1940.2 rules/units

      @Baron:

      I always plays 1942.2 with these units.
      Mechanized Infantry can be buy on first round.
      I don’t place any on the set-up.

      About Tactical on the set-up, I split the 6 planes for Germany and Japan into 3 Fgs and 3 TcBs.
      I change 2 Fgs for 2 TcBs with UK.
      1 Russian Fg for 1 TcB.
      With USA, I usually change 2 Fgs for 2 TcBs.

      However, I know that Oztea has made a few set-up with these units also.

      I enjoy these additional G40 pieces into 1942.2.

      My group isn’t played at a maximum optimized play, and I include myself.
      Mainly because we always try some HRs twist in every game.

      Okay, excellent!  And thank you.  That means I’m not the only one thinking along these lines and that the idea works.  I like your ideas and I’ll look for Oztea’s as well.  The combined arms rule tosses some new things into the mix and I really like that.  Reminds me of Fortress America.

      Do you use the naval/air bases?  As soon as I saw that idea I liked it and thought it quite interesting.  Gonna have to look at the convoy disruption thing again after a good nights sleep.  Reading it last night and wasn’t quite getting it.  But it looks interesting.

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • Merging 1942.2 with some 1940.2 rules/units

      As I’ve mentioned in some other threads, just moved up from A&A classic (playing since 1986) to 1942.2 and have really enjoyed the new rules and units.  Hanging out here on the forum today got me thinking about the G40 version.  So I thought I’d see about combining the two a little bit.  I ordered some tactical bombers and mechanized infantry pieces, along with some naval/air base counters from the Historical Board Gaming site.  This seemed reasonable without having to drop funds on either both 1940.2 games or buying French, Italian etc pieces.

      I’m ‘thinking’ that it would be a reasonable addition to add in stuff like naval/air bases along with tactical bombers and mech infantry to 1942.2.  I’m looking at the convoy disruption idea, but it’s late and I’m tired after a 12 hour shift on duty so I’m not getting that just yet.

      So with keeping with the 1942.2 board and OOB, I’d like to hear suggestions for the addition of some mech infantry and tactical bombers to the 1942.2 OOB that doesn’t OP anyone.

      Suggestions welcome (or if this has been done please point me in the right direction).  Thank you.  :-)

      posted in House Rules
      S
      SEP
    • RE: Supreme map 1942 ed 2

      Got it to work?  :-D

      posted in Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
      S
      SEP
    • 1 / 1