Posts made by tekkyy

@bugoo:

I was wondering if it would imbalance the game or add to it if there were locations where nations could build only inf on a territory as if it had an IC.  For example, I would allow the UK to do this on Egypt, India, Australia, and Canada.  I’d remove one of the Russian ICs and make it function in this manner, or perhaps all but the one on moscow.  Also, allow Germany to use Algeria, and either Norway or Finland in this manner.  Thoughts?

yeah you could just let any territories with 2+ IPC deploy infantry
its easier for gameplay to have a system than to short list territories

next section are the combat sequences, hit allocation, and retreat
lets start with land combat

hit allocation
your file didn’t have this section
so I presume you want to remove the rule that tanks hit tanks first?

combat sequence
your file didn’t make changes

I am thinking to let air units fire at the same time as anti-aircraft gun
in LHTR/OOB there are 2 outcomes for anti-aircraft (kill enemy planes before they drop bombs, or fail to shoot them)
in reality there is a 3rd and probably most common outcome (enemy planes dropped bombs and you shot some down)

this also means we don’t have to write a combat sequence
(which scares some players)
we now merely have two small headings to clarify “Conduct opening fire” and “Press Attack or Retreat” of LHTR/OOB’s

1\. Place units on battle board
2\. Conduct opening fire
3\. Remove opening fire casualties
4\. Attacking units fire
5\. Defending units fire
6\. Remove casualties
7\. Press attack or withdraw
8\. Concluding Combat

Step: Conduct opening fire
Air units only fire in opening fire step. After allocating anti-aircraft casualties, roll for attacking air units and allocate casualties. Then roll for defending air units and allocate casualties.

Step: Press attack or withdraw
your proposal
Land Combat Retreats
Either player can retreat after any full combat round. Retreat can be in full or in part. The attackers retreat must be to at least one of the territories the attacker can from. The defender can retreat to any controlled space. The defender always chooses retreat declarations first.
this is functionally fine

Amphibious assault
think we need to make it simpler
what are the most important aspects for you?

for me its
*retreat from amphibious assault by converting to infantry
*no shore bombardment dice, just +1 to infantry on 1-to-1 basis

your proposal

On the first round of any invasion by sea, all defending units fire first on the starting combat round. Invading Infantry are the only land units that may attack on the first round followed by any other units on latter rounds. Attacking pieces are removed and don’t fire in return. After that point combat is conducted normally.

too powerful and unrealistic
its not like the whole defending army had this preemptive power
think its better to just give defender +1

your proposal

In addition, the invading player may still retreat, except all retreating non-infantry units are converted to infantry before embankment on transports.

yeah convert to infantry, thats fine

your proposal

When invading the attacker is limited in the number of land units he may bring into battle by the IPC value of the territory that is invaded. It is also limited to 2 land units per round if the territory invaded is a mountainous or snowy terrain. Each round this number can be increased by this same value until all attacking units are in play. For example: in France the British decide to invade but can only bring in 6 land units the first round, 12 units the second, etc.

don’t think IPC is a good indication
there are more points of landing on the huge coastline of France than the small UK isle

and in the end axis and allies territories are huge
so I tend to only agree with restrictions for “small” territories like Gibraltar and Wake Island

restriction on mountainous terrain is difficult
in the it must be playable as Southern Europe and Japan are mountainous

your proposal

If the American player decided to use the D-Day option, this is doubled so it would be 6 land units per nation.

I notice your D-Day thing, and looking back we haven’t discussed round sequence…I must ask if you are thinking of getting rid of our beloved “all axis, all allies” round sequence?

active interdiction means interdicting movement of enemy units during your turn
so ground interdiction (GI) is not related to strategic redeployment (SR), which is movement of your units during your turn

don’t mix strategic redeployment with reinforcement, which is movement of enemy units (that did not fight) during your turn

air units and air missions added
(GI not there yet)
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/20090224experimental.doc
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/20090224experimental.pdf

beware, it is already 5 and 6 pages respectively
as we discuss the rest of phase 4: conduct combat we must not let complex or unneeded rules remain

@Imperious:

on this last part Night bombing needs a sentence like: " no enemy fighters can intercept night bombers and no aerial combat occurs if night bombing is chosen"

ok

WE need to make the interdiction a viable but not disastrous form of combat. Id prefer each bomber prevents X number of units from movement freely into or out of the territory. Its definatly something that should be included. Id like to keep it very similar to AA D-Day.
I know you don’t like it but draft something you would go with if included as optional rules.

prevent X units…ok thats active interdiction
effects are during YOUR turn

it’ll be “out of” the territory not “into”
as you are bombing the territory not neighbouring territories

wonder if it should have [dogfighting]
wonder if it should prevent [retreat]

Ground Interdiction (GI)
Bomber may perform GI against any enemy territory. [Attacker may send fighters as escorts. Defender may select fighters in the territory to defend.] Resolve antiaircraft fire as normal and remove casualties. [Defending fighters fight at 2. Attacking fighters fight at 1.] Remove causalities. Each surviving bomber roll a die. Defender select a number of land units equal to the die value. They are unable to [Retreat or] perform Reinforcement this turn.

we have variable IC costs in our house rule
the S M L idea leads me to think its not needed

IC in high income area = large IC
IC in low income area = small IC, less factories to build but higher cost of deployment in rural and areas of lower development

variable IC costs only makes sense if you adjust deployment rules accordingly
allow multiple IC and per turn deploy X units per IC

Strategic Bombing Raid

@Imperious:

During night bombing their is no fighter defense, so i guess thats the key to allow the equal opportunity. So the SBR must be declared as Day ( which allows unlimited fighter defense) or night which is 50% effective and NO fighter defense.

ok done.

_Strategic Bombing Run (SBR)
Bomber may perform SBR against any enemy territory. Attacker may send fighters as escorts. Defender may select fighters in the territory to defend. Resolve antiaircraft fire as normal and remove casualties. Defending fighters fight at 2. Attacking fighters fight at 1. Remove causalities. Each surviving bomber roll a die and territory income is reduced by that many IPCs during the next collect income phase.

Night Bombing
Bomber may perform Night Bombing agaisnt any enemy territory. Resolve antiaircraft fire as normal. Each bomber roll a die and territory income is reduced by 50% of die value rounded down, during the next collect income phase._

Ground Interdiction

Procedure:
Bombers are designated to specific territories. A token is placed and it remains in the territory till your next turn. If during the enemy turn he moves units in or out or traces SR thru the territory, then a roll occurs as per the rules.

give the full rule, elaborate “a roll occurs as per the rules”

if its like each unit roll to see if the movement was prevented
then it only makes sense for a hex map where a bomber bombs a choke point (a hex cell) while enemy units try to move through

just a while ago you were saying its not bombing the territory for 6 months
rather it just destroyed some roads and rails

don’t rush it
spend some time to think about:

*whether you want to model the bomber actively interdicting (bomb and pin enemy), or passively interdicting (bomb roads and rails)

*how to model the damage/effect, you can’t just give unlimited damage
-for active interdiction, each bomber can only prevents a numer of units
-for passive interdiction, its painful to guage, the enemy will just use another road

*how it will disrupt your ability to invade the territory

I’ve spend the time previously and saw the difficulty hence I sugguested we don’t have this rule

Strategic Bombing Raid

IL: Thats not the option, If a nation only has one factory, then the poor nations cant attack the swarm of fighters.
tekkyy: note in AARHE you bomb the territory to destroy income
we also had a rule (contributed by switch) where you bomb the industrial complex to destroy production capacity
IL: yes and thats an issue for the next version for AA50HE. If you want to do it now thats fine. But the real point is we want to give equal opportunity for anybody even with one bomber to bomb the enemy and not get wiped out.

no I was reminding you that SBR is performed on a territory not industrial complex in AARHE
ie. you can SBR Western Europe
this is regarding “nation only has one factory”

my stance isn’t to create equal opportunity
as I said before, if a player wants to suicide (inferior airforce performing SBR against superior airforce) its their choice to do so

losses during an SBR are prefectly normal
recall the comparison between the (A) Blitz, (B) V1 rockets, and © Allies strategic bombing compaign
(B) was much more cost effective, but it is not to say (A) or © is stupid
in (A), Germany vs UK, Germany can afford the losses
in ©, US+UK vs Germany, US+UK can afford the losses

Yes but its also not realistic to have a situation where the entire bomber force is wiped out because the other guy has 2-3 more planes.

its realistic if your 1 bomber division was outnumbered by the enemies’ 2-3 fighter divisions

its just suicide, the general wouldn’t have ordered such a move
solution below

but historically UK bombed Berlin in 1940 and they had a much smaller air force….so its got to be allowed somehow.

here we are talking about scale and damage that are orders of magnitude smaller
solution below

Lowering the value to Zero im afraid is not good enough, we should just limit the quantities. its got to be 1-2 because thats the minimum, plus its easy to remember the old AAE rule.

recall an old AARHE rule, where you can perform SBR at 50% effectiveness
we could use this rule, call it Night Bombing or something
we then limit bomber:escort and bomber:interceptor ratio to 1:2 as you wished

Counter Air

ok lets try that. lets see the scripting…

Counter Air (CA)
Fighter may perform CA against any enemy territory. Defender selects at least the same number of air units in the territory to fight. The selected air units may not perform Air Reinforcement this turn. Resolve antiaircraft fire as normal and remove casualties. Fighters fight at 2. Bombers fight at 1. Attacking fighters must retreat to the original territory in Non-combat Move phase.

but you write the name MUST… thats not the way to write it out. One is rather limited in CA from performing other missions as the defender unless you have extra planes than the attacker.

thats because its not optional
if Germany sends 3 fighters on a CA mission to London
UK MUST send at least 3 air units to fight

Ground Interdiction

Its not that the bombers are “hovering” for 6 months, its that they are blowing the crap out of railroads, trains, roads,transportation centers…anything that effects movement to other fronts.

ok we could keep it
but regardless I don’t agree with

The rule prevents the existing units from moving ON THEIR TURN.

it should be preventing movement of enemy land units ON YOUR TURN
ie. “Reinforcement” during phase 5: Non-combat Move

well just write the mission out is very short sequence like you did before, but real short. The way it was written was not clear.

combat move:
1. active players declare combat moves and air missions
2. passive players declare air reinforcement (because X attacking CA units prevents X defending units from performing air reinforcement)

conduct combat:
1. resolve air missions (eg. SBR)
2. resolve normal combat

I am also trying to write it short
hence I just said
Air missions are resolved before normal combats and before Air Reinforcement units arrive.
it could be written differently of course

regarding costs
paying for overtime or express freight is to me below the level of abstraction
and may not make complete sense in war (total war)

“defender fight to death” makes better sense in hex level variants
where turns represent a shorter period

in this case only one cycle of combat occurs
neither side retreats

simply one move phase, one fight phase per turn

Strategic Bombing Raid

Thats not the option, If a nation only has one factory, then the poor nations cant attack the swarm of fighters.

note in AARHE you bomb the territory to destroy income
we also had a rule (contributed by switch) where you bomb the industrial complex to destroy production capacity

IN the war historically UK didnt have the air forces as Germany but still managed to bomb Berlin.

we can think of why and model that
it just seems artifical to limit the size of the escort fleet or intercept fleet

so UK can bomb without losing too much
maybe its due to the length of the dogfight during an SBR being shorter than normal combat
in this case to be realistic we reduce the combat values

0 for escort fighters
1 for intercept fighters

Counter Air

I think this would work i note that ONLY in this case both attacker and defender fighters are at 2.

yes only in CA
attacking fighters in SBR are handicapped as they are escorting the bombers
but in CA attacking fighters are much closer to equal footing

Defender must send at least the same number of air units in the territory to defend.They may not perform Air Reinforcement this turn.

Also, The sentence underlined makes no sence to me.

same as before just worded differently
CA missions lets you attack and tie down defending air units

so if attacker sends 3 fighters, at least the same number of defending air units in the territory are tied down
if the defender has more than 3 air units in the territory he can send them to defend too if he wants

keep it like this:
Defensive Air Support Mission (DAS)…

DAS rule is “Close Air Support” in reality, which is just normal combat in the game
hence we don’t have DAS anymore

what we do have is “Air Reinforcement” in phase 3: combat move
come on, this was only like a week or 2 ago

Counter Air Mission (CA)…
Strategic Bombing Run (SBR)…

hehe you’ve just relisted the rules
we’ll see, still discussing ideas

Ground Interdiction

The rule prevents the existing units from moving ON THEIR TURN. It makes no claim as to units moving into and or thru the territory. Its very simple and effective use of suppression to prevent forces from advancing. its fine as it is.

just saying “its fine as it is” doesn’t add weight to your argument
hopefully you can reply to my concerns directly

I’ve only seen this kind of rule in hex games (squad level) and games with turns representing short time periods
applying it to axis and allies revised…
it doesn’t make sense for entire armies to be pinned by bombers
it doesn’t make sense for bombers to remain in enemy territory for 6 months

D-Day had a GI rule right?
its hex level, short time periods, and Allies have air superiority

Fighter Escorts and Interceptors
Defending interceptors must return to their original territory.

the time frame in AARHE is that air missions are resolved before normal combats,
air missions occur before Air Reinforcement or DAS units arrive

Air units - done

Dogfights - removed, values listed under “Air Units”

Antiaircraft - done

Strategic Bombing Raid

OK look at the example where a nation with 1 bomber wants to bomb and has just 1-2 fighters and the other side has 6 fighters…well you can see that the attackers mission will result in failure

but thats the thing, realistically if your enemy has superior air force and you insist on bombing them…you are simply taking on great risks

your option should be to hit the less guarded territories, or get rockets

Counter Air

in the first case its like an SBR attack but with no bombers. your goal is to kill planes. Attacker at 1, defender at 2
this is a good rule.

yeah no bombers because they are much slower
and unlike SBR there are no bombers to protect
so I think fighters of both side should be fighting at 2

proposed text
_Counter Air (CA)
Fighter may perform CA against any enemy territory. Defender must send at least the same number of air units in the territory to defend. They may not perform Air Reinforcement this turn. Resolve antiaircraft fire as normal and remove casualties. Fighters fight at 2. Bombers fight at 1.

Ground Interdiction
your text
Bomber may make an interdiction attack against land units in a hostile territory. You may bring other air units besides bomber as escorts. AA guns fire before this aerial combat. One cycle of aerial combat occurs between your air units and defending air units at dog fighting values. If a bomber survives it may roll for ground interdiction with die value equal to number of land units performing combat reinforcements now prevented from moving.

In the second case adjacent fighters can assist an attacked territory. fighting at air combat values

I was hoping to be consistent and consider Air Missions to be fast and not defendable by air units coming from Air Reinforcement

maybe the rule doesn’t make sense and should be removed
should it prevent non-combat reinforcement, or should it prevent retreat, or should it require total air superiority
this kind of rule has only appeared in hex games anyway right?

Air Missions
Air missions are resolved before normal combats and before Air Reinforcement units arrive.

I think your saying the active player performs all air missions first, while some of these types of mission require the defender to make decisions, so its not a proper thing to say the passive player cant allocate his planes for defensive missions like Air reinforcement or SBR interceptions.

remember Air Reinforcement is not an air mission but a heading from phase 3: combat move
it is a relocation of Air Units to adjacent territories
so defending fighters coming from adjacent territories can assist in normal combats, but not air missions_

I’ve been on work trips

yeah I could paste paragraphs from your 112508 file if you insist
just didn’t want huge posts as you often seem so rushed

Air units
your text
Land Combat: Air Units
When both sides have air units present air units fight at air combat values. Aerial combat occurs and air units do not attack land units. Hits must be allocated on other air units before transport plane.

yes more like OOB
but keep AARHE’s rule of dogfight hits allocated on air units first right?

proposed text
Air Units
When both sides have air units present air units fight at air combat values. The hits must be allocated on air units first. Fighters fight at 2 and bombers fight at 1.

Dogfights
your text
Dogfights
When planes fight in land battles they now are rolling against each other and allocating other air units as hits before land units can be hit. AS such they have different dogfight values as follows:
Fighters: 3
Fighter-Bomber: 2 ( optional unit)
Bomber: 1
Heavy Bomber: 2 (technology upgrade)
Jet fighters: 4 (technology upgrade)

the values I posted were what you had
I am saying I think fighter should be @ 2 or it’ll be bloody
no proposed text
closing this heading as discussed, “air units” heading and “dogfight” heading combined into one small heading

Antiaircraft
your text
Anti-Air
Each starting factory comes with 1 AA gun and is rolled as follows: count the number of air units flying over and for every 6 air units allocate on hit by lining up the air units and the die roll destroys the unit in the sequence. If you have less than 6 air units, then follow the same procedure, except you need to roll the quantity of planes or less to score a hit. Example: Germany flies 3 fighters over London, so UK player needs to roll 3 or less to hit. Only one AA roll for all the air units.

yep like OOB but just cap of 3 rolls per AA gun
of course we keep the old AARHE rule of not shooting at over flying units

proposed text
Antiaircraft
Air units are only subject to antiaircraft fire at the territory they are attacking. Roll one die against each attacking air unit. You may only roll up to 3 dice per Antiaircraft gun.

Strategic Bombing Raid
your text
Strategic Bombing Run (SBR)
Bomber may perform SBR against a hostile territory. During SBR attacks the defending player can bring in planes to fight against bombers defending at a 2. The attacker can bring in escorts to escort his bombers and they attack at 1. The maximum number of defending planes cannot exceed the total number of attacking air units including bombers. Only one round of air combat occurs prior to SBR rolls. The attacker can not bring in more escorts than bombers. Note: The AA gun rolls only against the bombers and not against the escorting fighters. The surviving bombers roll 1D6 which reduces the IPC of the player immediately.

SBR raid is one round and dogfights can be multiple rounds. The pre SBR dogfight is not meant to chew up planes. SOI we just keep the OOB from AAE.

hehe your system is not quite as simple as AAE/AAP
the only bit you took from AAE/AAP is the 2 and 1 combat values

lets stick closer
and use AAP (because I prefer Antiaircraft to remain preemptive)

the only thing is we use AARHE’s aircraft procedure
(that way fighters can’t shield bombers from antiaircraft gun, funny but unrealistic…I guess AAE and AAP DID come out before AAR)

proposed text
Strategic Bombing Run (SBR)
Bomber may perform SBR against any enemy territory. Attacker may send fighters as escorts. Defender may send fighters in the territory to defend. Resolve antiaircraft fire as normal and remove casualities. Defending fighters fight at 2. Attacking fighters fight at 1. Remove caualities. Each surviving bomber roll a die and territory income is reduced by that many IPCs during the next collect income phase.

Counter Air (CA)
I am still thining about this
want simplicity, consistency

Ground Interdiction
I am still thinking about this
want simplicity, consistency

your proposed rule’s refers to “combat reinforcements”
AARHE doesn’t have combat reinforcements since a long while back
we only have non-combat reinforcements

Yes this is stripped down. They must be adjacent in order to participate.
The rules no longer have “NC reinforcements” but they do have strategic redeployment.

the stripped down part I think you are referring to phase 3: “Air Reinforcement”
Non-combat Reinforcement is in phase 5 and for land units

yes I did notice your 112508 file did not have the “Reinforcement” rule in phase 5 and only had “Strategic Redeployment” (SR)
SR has previously been an optional rule due to complexity
I wouldn’t agree to have it as a standard rule in the current form, let your idea of putting in your unused movement point idea into SR

regardless, in their current form SR is not a replacement for “Reinforcement” in phase 5
Reinforcement addresses a very different issue
it is due to defender retreat, making defending units under attack can move but untouched defending units may not…hence untouched defending units should be able to relocate

we are not discussing combat sequence yet but I am just want to clarify my position on Reinforcement and Strategic Redeployment

Air Missions overall heading
your text
Air Missions
Each air unit can only perform one air mission per turn. It may not perform normal combat in the same turn. Air missions are declared with normal combat moves. Air missions are resolved before normal combats and before Defensive Air Support air units arrive.

adjustment to AAE/AAP system as you wish
defending air units cannot participate in normal combat

proposed text
Air Missions
Each air unit can only perform one air mission per turn. Air units performing air missions and air units defending against air missions may not partcipate in other combat this turn. Defending air units may retreat if territory control is lost. Air missions are resolved before normal combats and before Air Reinforcement units arrive.

I’ve updated
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/20090120experimental.doc
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/20090120experimental.pdf

Phase 4: Conduct Combat
lets discuss air units and air missions first
(land and naval combat sequence later)

Air units
in your 112508 file you no longer have AARHE’s
a) land units hits can’t be allocated on enemy air units
b) friendly air units in excess of friendly land units fight at combat value of 1
yeah ok, its simpler and closer to OOB

we just say air units hits must be allocated against air units first
(hopefully a basic and consistent system across both land and naval combat)

Dogfights
you proposed these values
fighter = 3
bomber = 1
I think fighter should be 2

Anti-aircraft
you proposed an auto kill 1 air unit for every 6 air units
you also ask the player to do this lining up thing
and that only one AA fire

OOB is too powerful
your proposal made it weaker, but OOB’s unlimited fire of AA gun remains
your proposal lets defender choose casualty (albeit before dice) but this still allows bombers to never die, but this was the issue which resulted in Revised AA rules vs. Classic AA rules

so I propose a simple rule, from some variant (world at war?)
each AA gun fire against up to 3 air units
still targetted
still hit on a 1
still $5

Counter Air
you proposed no no changes

Strategic Bombing Raid
you proposed defending air units fight at 2 and attacking escorts fight at 1, why?
I proposed only the fighters dogfight

you proposed attacker can’t bring more escorts than bombers, why?
you proposed defender can’t use more air units then total attacking air units, why?
I don’t think these limits are realistic, when enemy has a larger air force they should be able to hurt you

Ground Interdiction
your proposed rule’s refers to “combat reinforcements”
AARHE doesn’t have combat reinforcements since a long while back
we only have non-combat reinforcements

1a)
our idea was to include submarines and surface raiders right?
hence I didn’t include capital ships (larger and slower)

to represent German “merchart raiders” we could include Transport instead of Destroyer
then maybe for every German Submarine or Transport ?

if its realistic to include capital ships (please describe)
then maybe we won’t need to say submarines but just for every German naval unit (except Transport) ?

1b)
yes ok, it’ll be simpler

yes ok, but as mentioned I think “1 land unit” won’t help USSR except in early game

after a few games you might to change the values again
I recommend you buy some chips and freely customize the income values
in this scenario IL could give you a map with no income values

our discussion involved actual scripts
but check anyway to see if we understood each other correctly

http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/20090119experimental.doc
http://home.exetel.com.au/cometo/aarhe/20090119experimental.pdf

under phase 1 we have “Soviet Partisans”
under phase 3 we have the rest
under phase 6 we have “Soviet Factories”

Land Movement (removed)
Airborne Drop (optional)
Soviet Winter (scenario rule)

for phase 4: conduct combat we’ll have pick a section first
*air units
*land combat
*naval combat
*air missions

I sugguest we do air units first
this is one area we wanted to simplify right?

ok fine, this is now assumed under Strategic Redeployment.

yeah you’ll show me when we get to phase 5
note that strategic Redeployment was an optional rule

*in OOB we declare decisions at the end of the combat cycle, I have reservations about shifting that to the
beginning of the cycle

ok then you declare what you retreat at start of round and these units dont fire.

no I am saying I hope we don’t have to shift it to the beginning of the cycle
your proposed rule did shift it
anyway we’ll discuss it when it comes

Submarine Movement - done

thats fine, and the naval force can elect to attack the sub and allow the transports movement in NCM thru the empty zone.

yes as defined in OOB/LHTR, if the submarines are killed or submerged, then any of your naval unit can move through the sea zone in NCM

Soviet Factories - done

pree@Imperious:

BB= preemptive fire in all combat unless another battleship is present ( long range guns)

by the way the “unless another [enemy] battleship is present” bit was superseded and removed

shouldn’t say “all combat”, its inflexible as its unknown what the shore bombardment rules are going to be

Retreat (phase 4: conduct combat)
don’t have to decide on all details now
we just need to know we don’t need that “unused movement points” rule
we can continue now
discuss and finalise the many aspects of retreat when we go to phase 4: conduct combat

last comments
*in OOB we declare decisions at the end of the combat cycle, I have reservations about shifting that to the
beginning of the cycle
*could try to remove partial retreat

Naval Movement

i was favoring option B. I prefer the transports run thru the gauntlet of possible sub attacks, which was the reason why they roll for interception and attack, while it was a 1:1 basis ( excess transports pass and are not rolled against)

thats fine, (B) is essentially 1:1
2 submarines can’t kill 4 transports…2 transports are 100% safe

Naval Movement
Naval units may go through sea zones consisting of only enemy submarines or transports. Each enemy submarine rolls a die at its combat value. Hits can only be allocated on transports going through.

Soviet Factories

4.1 is not using any NA’s this is a short version, so some of the more needed items need to remain to help balance out the Soviet predicament because we dont allow allied units in Russia, so lend lease is not enough and the soviets need other things to help them out as a result of playtest.

we are both happy to boost the Soviets!
I am saying “each IC can move once per game” don’t help them much
its also one more thing to remember

moving a factory is like building a factory. we use the same rules. you place in one turn the factory and place units the next. The only difference is in this case we are taking an existing factory and moving it instead.

yeah ok place factory this turn, place units next turn
I don’t see the Soviet player abusing since they can’t build there this turn

Soviet Factories
At the beginning of Mobilize New Units phase, the Soviet player may relocate one Industrial Complex. Both territories must be a currently held original Soviet territory. You may not mobilize new units at the Industrial Complex this turn.

(2) already increased submarine survivability a lot (compared to AA50)
do we really need (3)?

anyway (3) is still quite complex
especially the modified combat value bit
I think the fact that only DD and air can hit stealth mode submarines is doing something already

you could be more gradual with the first version of AA50e?