Posts made by Trig

@theveteran So? That is the job of other units.

@theveteran Have you seen his videos on rule design and playtesting?

@theveteran On here his name is @Jinx1527

@theveteran Yes, but that rule only comes into effect after the invasion. My rule allows for the large US coastline to defended without over taxing the small US army. It is far to easy to sneak attack and snipe one open land zone on the US, thus denying the a VP permentanlty.

@theveteran Militia are really quite strong due to their low cost and flexibility in building. They are the perfect cannon fodder in large numbers.

@adalwolf It has been FAQed:
Q: When Germany Annexes Bohemia, is the Medium Factory downgraded to a Minor Factory as per 12.4?

A: No.

I don’t really understand why, but it is up.

@aldrahill That is a carry over from v2. In it, Germany had a wartime bonus income of +1 IPP if the Nationalists were neutral and had won the war. This was replaced in v3 with the current blue division rules. (+1 infantry every turn)
In v2, the Blue division was a bonus. Now it is a malus. Several expansions have old holdovers like this.

@unicorn I would assume so.
In cases like this, I would take the expansion rules in precedence.

@hms-serapis Similar points to @insaneHoshi
Carriers give better fleet defense. Planes on island have to have an airbase built, and then only 3 fighters can scramble, and then even with radar, you still can’t scrabble tactical bombers.
Also, you have to capture an island the turn before you can land planes on it. So unless you have some very good ANZAC forces that don’t mind doing all the heavy lifting, you have to leave your fleet one turn ahead of your planes. (Reinforcement of captured bases only applies for the Marshals and Carolines.)
Range is better on a carrier. You don’t have to exit the island, and you can land where you don’t control islands. (See above point.) With a land based plane, you need Long Range Aircraft and and airbase to hit an island in the next sea zone. Or you can use a carrier. Carriers are needed to get effective island hopping going, as bombards only go so far aginst a determined Japanese militia spam.
Also, MAP off a carrier is so much better than MAP off an island.
Carriers are capital ships, meaning they give you hit points to take in battle, and are essential for a American VP.

Also, there is not always an island there. The northern Pacific is rather short on islands. And carriers can move to respond to threats. Islands can’t.

Carriers definitely have a role in maximizing the efficiency of an American push, and that should be the cornerstone of all US strategy, no matter the theater. Making the most of the short time the US is in the war is the best way for the Allies to achieve a victory.

@didier_de_dax said in Canada and Canada at War expansion question:

Hey!

I have a few questions about Canada and the Expansion Canada At War.

-First, Is Ottawa bordering sea zone 21 ?
I think so, but it needs an FAQ.

-Then, On page 2 of the Canadian reference sheet (https://www.historicalboardgaming.com/assets/images/HBG/GW1936v3/Ref Sheets/Canada-V4-32.pdf ), we can read in the corvette description: “Imp. Shipyard tech reduces cost to 3 IPP”.

I think, Improved Shipyard tech refer to the Improved Construction tech?

But why is it need to precise the effect of this tech there? Does that mean that the Improved construction cost reduction for the ship IPP cycle doesn’t apply for the one cycle ship like destroyers, transports or submarines?
(For example: even with the improved construction tech, the subs, destroyers and transports cost is unchanged?)
This is a holdover from v2. In it different ships got different reductions on the first phase of construction. Don’t read to much into it.

-Last, on page 1 of the Canada at War expansion, in the section Peacetime Income Increase we can read: “Axis submarines end their turn on a British convoy line”.

The problem is that Italy has a submarine in sea zone 80, where there is a British Convoy line, at the start of the game in 1936.
Italy’s turn is after the Canadian one, so Canada is always going to have this +1 bonus income on the first turn?
Or Italy isn’t considered member of the axis at the start of the game?
I’m not sure if you are using the updated 3.3 rules, but in them, Canada does not get any peacetime income increases. So this is a no longer an issue.
Thanks for your answer.
I hope this helps

@vondox said in Militia questions:

I have a few questions concerning Militia… First, let me start with some rules from HBG…

Militia can be built at a non-factory site up the worth of the IPP value of that land zone. YES

1. A land zone of 3 IPP in a home country Originally owned territory can generate 3 militia units per turn. or three 1-IPP zones can generate 1 militia each per turn. YES

Question: A medium factory has 3 product slots per turn and it is in a land zone worth two IPPs… So can the player build a total of 5 militia there? 3 from the factory and 2 from the land zone? NO

2. In a captured land zone the maximum number of Militia units that can be built is always 1, regardless of the IPP value of that land zone. YES

Question: Germany captures all of France and every turn the player invests 10 IPPs to build there. In several turns Germany has built up a sizeable number of militia units. The US invades. Can the German player begin to move the Militia units from land zone to land zone within France? NO Can the German player move Militia units into Germany? NO

My reading of the rules would indicate that if a Militia is raised in Picardy then it must stay in Picardy if it was a Militia unit raised by the Germans. YES

KMT, CCP, Nat Spain and Repub Spain can raise militia in each territory but NONE of them can move to an adjacent territory as part of an attack. YES

Militias raised in land zones by MINOR POWERS can not MOVE out the land zone they are raised. YES
Militias raised in land zones that were conquered by a MAJOR power can NOT move out of the land zone they were raised in YES If YES, can they move in the landzone’s of the HOME AREA they were raised in ( IE… Militia raised by Germany in France can move around in France but not out of France. NO
Militias raised by a nation in their HOME COUNTRY can move about freely ( 1 move per turn ) to any other home country land zone and can participate in attacks on home country land zones with other land units. YES

In short:

• Militia can be built up to the IPP value of an Home country territory (Minimum one) and can move within home country.
• Militia may be build up to the IPP value of a non home country originally possessesed territory (Minimum one) and may not move.
• ONE militia may be built in any other territory and may not move.

@aftertaste I don’t want to make the tech that powerful.
Think about it this way:
Any one with radar can build light cruisers, and then they fight just as well as a heavy cruiser for two less IPP. Over time, that get very scary, especially when you can get US Cleveland swarms.
(This is with +1 all the time)

Also, on subs, I was writing from memory and just didn’t realize what you wrote. :)

@chris_henry I really like to take Mongolia in Jul 39. It is 2 almost free IPP, and force Japan or the KMT to defend more borderlands, and can give a lend lease route or bonuses to the CCP. It is a strong position.

As for balance, the main thing the USST gets here versus OOB when the attack Mongolia early is the abilty to do some more border clashes and positioning aginst Japan in the 30’s. That and one extra unit (probably cavalry) once at war
If this gets to OP, then I might try buffing Japan with a militia or two, or the Manchukuo expansion, but it hasn’t been a big deal.

For VPs, the USSR can attack, but then has to fight any Japanese forces nearby, or can just wait and DOW Japan to gain the two territories for the VP.

The main point of this is to improve the historicity of the area, and add some options to an often boring theater.

@insanehoshi That is true, but I found that that would lead to just attacking Mongolia b/c then they had a better position on China and got the money before wartime. Also, the VPs.

@aftertaste I personally really do like the idea of shipborne radar being a bigger deal, but I am not sure how to implement it. the +1 does seem a bit OP.
Maybe they get +1 attack on round one? Or something like that, for the element of surprise.
I also wouldn’t give a bonus to subs, as radar wasn’t used on them as much.

@david-06 A lot. Think how many there are now, and then add a few. Hunting was more popular then I believe, and a gun was still a household item.
And it isn’t necessarily that everyone has one, but that you don’t have a good way to eliminate those who own one. Anyone could have a gun or 5, and that chance that there are guns make an invade very nervous to go walking down a street with windows.

In GW36v3 games, I’ve noticed that the USSR tends to attack Mongolia almost every time. This is because there is two IPP, defended only by a militia and a Calvary, and there is virtually no incentive to not attack, as there is almost no chance of Mongolia aligning to the USSR out of box.
This is quite ahistorical, as the Soviets had good relations with their communist neighbor, (one of only a few nations to even consider is independent and not part of China) and never even planed to invade. Mongolian units even fought on the Eastern front aginst Germany.
Given this, I have decided to house rule a reason for the USSR to not attack Mongolia, and better reflect their relationship.

Mongolia:

• The USSR controls Mongolia. They may use Mongolia’s units as if they were USSR units, but they may not leave Mongolia. (This means they can border clash with Japan.)
• The USSR may move its own units into, out of, and through Mongolian territories and may conduct combat (ie border clashes) from them.
• The USSR gains any Mongolian income once at war with a major power, and may align one Mongolian unit.
• Mongolia has a recruitment roll until it aligns.
• Mongolia aligns with the USSR if attacked by a non Comintern power, or if the USSR is at war with Japan.
• If Mongolia is attached by the USSR, Japan may align it.

This allows the USSR to gain benefits from Mongolia, without attacking it, and punishes it somewhat by allowing Japan to get involved if the USSR attacks.

Thoughts?

@insanehoshi Oh Yes!
You don’t have to place units if you can’t.

Thus, if you save up you can buy two or three turn of infantry to place over time, along with heavier units.

This doesn’t work as well with militia, as you have to fill up all the Siberian territories before you can hold any over till next turn, so I wouldn’t waste that many militia where they will never see the fight.

On memorable game I saved up around 200 IPP with the USSR, and built ~50 Militia, ~30 Infantry, and ~20 tanks on the turn they were at war. The Germans didn’t know what hit them.

@captainnapalm FAQed:
Q: Does a GB declaration of war on Germany make FEC/ANZAC go to full income?

A: Yes. British Commonwealth is one nation when it comes to diplomacy and many other things (as per 2.3).

@panzerbaguette I would say you lose it. Mainly b/c you are at war with no major powers anymore. That said, it is a very rare occasion.