Posts made by WILD BILL

Ok, so this would basically be like setting-up contingency battles. If you win the first battle, your mechanized/air units held in reserve (didn’t participate in battle) could move through the newly conquered territory to perform an attack. I would probably also allow mech to drag an inf or art with it into battle. I think this is pretty good, and units don’t get to pull double duty.

You would still leave your expensive units exposed though attacking deep into enemy lines, so should all ground units be allowed to move 2 spaces in NCM to help protect your gains (part of my original post). This would take some planning and maybe some limits could apply?

Because it would be a powerful tool for the attacker (can’t picket as defender), maybe a defender retreat should also be considered after each round of battle (I think air should for sure be given a def retreat option)

As for navy, yea I think something like this could be done there too, but a defender retreat option would be needed.

I was also thinking of a rule that allowed you to make a second attack w/mechanized units that still have movement left if you killed the enemy in one round of battle (kinda eliminate the 1 inf picket). Maybe restrict it to 1 break-thru battle per turn?

The thing is that you would also need to be able to NCM some units (inf) in to protect your expensive units at the front. That’s why I was thinking about allowing all units to move 2 spaces in NCM. Allowing ftrs to land in newly taken territory is also interesting.

This is just a concept, but I’m looking to develop a different mechanic that will allow for a second combat move for units that are eligible to do so (mechanized units and air mostly). I also want to be able to immediately reinforce these positions so you don’t break-thru the enemy lines just to get your expensive units killed in a counter attack. To do this I’m also looking at allowing all units to move 2 spaces in NCM to simulate rail or mobility. There is also some talks about a special forces (SF) unit that would be able to move 2 spaces, so I’m including this unit in this “blitz move” concept.

My though is that your mech and tanks could perform as they do now (move 2 spaces and attack, or your traditional blitz an unoccupied enemy territory then attack). If they moved 2 spaces in the normal combat phase, they wouldn’t be eligible to do a “blitz move” (second attack) because they would have no movement left. However if your tanks and mech moved only one space, or didn’t move at all in the normal combat they would be able to perform a “blitz move” (second combat).

So if you break-thru the enemy lines you can have eligible units make a “blitz move”, or second combat. Units are eligible as long as they still have movement left, even if they were used in the normal combat phase.

Eligible units would be tanks, mech, SF and air that still have movement left (air would still have to land safely with in their original movement restrictions). I’m also probably going to allow a mech to bring an inf or art into the “blitz move”.

The NCM will allow any unit that didn’t move in the combat or blitz phase to move 2 spaces. Again this gives some rail or mobility capabilities to the game as a whole, and allows you to reinforce your new territorial gains with less risk to your break-thru units.

Like I said it is only a concept to me, but I’m sure others have implemented similar house rules into G40. I realize this will be quite an advantage to the dark side, and would need a pretty good tweak to the set-up so Russia, India and China don’t get over ran. It could help the allies some though, like the Russians getting the Siberians home double time, or UK moving inf through Africa-Middle East-India-China faster. Any thoughts?

Nice piece, and I’m looking at a similar unit myself (along with a bunch of other changes).

I’ve got a SF c4, a2, d2, m1. I’m looking at it as a Paratrooper, Marine, Commando type of unit. As a Paratrooper it can launch from an AB 3 spaces (1 per AB), or be dropped from bmr. Can be transported by cruiser, battleship, or transport (takes the space of an inf).

Allowing bmr to drop SF in combat (1 per bmr) may solve your airstrip problem w/o adding a bunch of airstrips. I wanted to keep the cost down, so a 2/2 unit seemed ok. I don’t allow an art pairing, and you can’t para w/o other units attacking via ground or amphib.

Just to point out, in an amphib I’m also looking at inf not getting an art pairing +1 bonus in the first round (would be attacking at 1 in the first round), and maybe art/tanks not being able to fire in the first round either. So if you want to take a beach you would probably want to use some SF.

I think you have a good point about the Mongolian rule not being harsh enough to keep the Japanese from attacking Russia (or vise-versa). A couple well placed Japanese inf/mech and air can pretty much take out the Mongolians (Russian inf) with ease. Plus if the allies want to KJF and overload the Japanese by having the Russians invade Manchuria, the Mongols won’t join the Russians now (big deal lol)

I don’t think you should take away the Japanese or Russian abilities to attack each other out of the game though. I realize that this isn’t historical, and that it would have been virtually impossible for the Japanese to march through Siberia or China all the way to Moscow. However the Germans tried to persuade the Japanese to open up another front, not necessarily to directly attack the back side of Moscow, but to keep Russian resources away from the German lines. There were many border clashes leading up to the NAP, and neither side trusted each other. Plus both sides kept forces at the border just in case (although the Russians did recall much of the far east units to the German front).

Say the Germans did invade England, and they lost a lot of resources doing so. Many historians pegged the Russians to wait until the two sides wiped each other out, and invade a weakened Germany afterwords. As far as game terms go, w/Sea Lion the Russians feeling all warm and fuzzy should be able to invade Japanese held territories if they want too. Just because it didn’t happen doesn’t mean it couldn’t have.

With that said, in addition to the Mongolian rule there should be more of a penalty if either side violates the NAP. This should be a troop deployment to the region that is attacked, and not an IPC increase or unit placement awarded to the victim to place anywhere he can (in another theater). I also think that 30 IPC is way too much of a penalty.

Maybe something like if your enemy breaks the NAP and invades one of your originally controlled  territories (territory you controlled when the game stated) you get to immediately place 12 IPCs in units on the territory being attacked, or in a territory adjacent to it. This would represent both sides have a defensive build up at the border, but you wouldn’t necessarily know the strength and placement of enemy units. Plus it would allow you to move actual units away from the border into areas you need them.

This wouldn’t stop the Russians from setting up def in China, or fighting between the Rus/Japan in  interior China. It would only go into effect once one side attacks a territory that the other started the game with. You would be able to place the awarded units in the territory being attacked, or in an adjacent territory (or both) depending on the situation you find yourself in. If they attacked multiple territories you have more options for placement, but it would be in a region near the attacks (not dropped in Moscow or Leningrad).

Yea, if they have all 3 carriers in sz26 all bets are off (need to go def). If that is the case though you will probably still be holding the Phil Isl (w/navy sunk), and can save the Phil ftr (fly to Queensland or Burma?)

I 100% agree with Shadow that mutual destruction is a win for the allies (even though you might lose more in IPC value). You need to be committed with the US, and be willing to go 2 rounds then re-evaluate. The first round you will be killing off the Japanese support ships, and dinging the BB. It’s the 2nd round of combat that will force the Japanese to make some tough decisions, and open up the door to continue the attack, or leave it for the Anzac to finish it. Keep in mind the Anz only have 4 units, and they all attack at 3.

Even if the Japanese manage to keep a carrier or battle ship alive they are severely handicapped the rest of the game. I also agree that you should probably build on the Pac side for a turn or two to gain control before switching to the Euro side. UK should probably prepare as if a Sea Lion is on the table too. Once the axis get hit hard on the Pac side, they may feel that risking Sea Lion is a good option to re-gain the advantage (especially when you consider your post that says that’s what they like to do).

Let us know how it goes, and make sure you don’t tip him off. Post a picture of the Japanese players face when you set-up your counter attack on sz26 and he realizes that he is screwed (especially once you point out the 1-2 punch w/Anz)
WB

@AlphaAeffchen:

@ShadowHawk,

Ok they wipe out the complete American fleet at Hawaii. They are there with 2 Carriers fully loaded with fighters. One battleship, one submarine, 2 destoyes, 1 cruiser and one Transport.

Ohh they only loose planes which Japan can totally afford because they move their planes from Japan and other isles or the other carrier in tactical movement to refill the carriesrs at hawaii.

An american atttack on this flleet is suicide and gives america nothing even if they can sink some ships there is nothing left from the USA which is a Desaster for them in the pacific, because it takes to much time to rebuild the fleet.

Also I thin they conquer Hawaii first turn (but definetly 2nd turn) but im not sure because its 3 months ago….

Ok like Arthur said the Japanese aren’t taking Hawaii J1, and that works to your advantage. If they put that fleet in sz26 (1ss, 2dd, 1ca, 1bb 2cv, 4ftr) I would have to hit it with everything the US has. You have 1dd, 1ca, 1 bb, 1cv, 5ftrs, 1tac, and a bmr that can hit it. Yea you have crappy odds, but its not a fight to the finish, you’re only looking to go a couple rounds. The thing is to hit him, and then retreat your air, and maybe a damaged bb (land on Hawaii), and then let the Anz finish him off with 3ftrs, and a cruiser (planes land on Hawaii). The Japanese can only absorb so many hits before it starts to hurt, and if they take a hit on a carrier you can retreat with the US and watch his planes crash into the sea because they have no place to land because he didn’t take Hawaii (less for the ANZ to deal with).

The last thing that the Japanese want to do is start buying expensive ships, and that is what the US lives for. Once you take out the biggest part of the Japanese navy it should be all down hill from there.

What we see more often is the Japanese hit the Pearl fleet, and NCM the carriers, bb and ca to Wake, but they make sure that a Japanese dd survives the attack on sz26 to block out the US sz10 fleet from hitting the Wake fleet.

G1, sink as many US ships as you can in the opening round starting with G1 attack of the US cruiser/transport in sz101, followed by a J1 attack on Phil and Hawaiian fleets.

Battle bucks, Monopoly Money, or poker chips would all be good tools for the game IMO to track each powers income, and the extra chips will come in handy. As for buying infantry for the neutral territories, this you can do without IMO.

There are pro-axis, pro-allied, and strict neutrals in the game. All these neutrals have their standing armies silhouetted on the map, so you don’t have to reference anything to see what is there.

I would suggest you keep the strict neutrals off limits for the first couple games so you can focus on the normal game mechanics and rules. There is also a rule that says if you attack any strict neutral that all the other strict neutrals will join the other side (become pro your enemy), so things can get pretty strange. Mongolia has it’s own set of rules that makes them different, and can be activated w/o changing the stance of the other strict neutrals. It is generally the Japanese breaking the Non Aggression Pact (NAP) that activate Mongolia and you would use Russian inf for the Mongolians if that happens.

Most of the pro axis/allied neutrals are activated in the first round of play starting with Germany’s turn who goes first. So Germany could be attacking pro-allied territories during the combat phase, or integrating pro-axis territories during the non combat move phase (NCM).

Example, Germany attacking a pro allied neutral:
Say the Germans want to attack Yugoslavia that has 5 inf silhouetted on the map. The Germans set-up the attack during their combat move phase, and attack during combat. You can just remember that Germany needs to kill 5 inf in the battle, or you can use 5 gray chips to represent the Yugo inf (the Yugo inf will get to return fire). If the Germans kill all the Yugo inf and take the territory then there is nothing else to worry about. If for some reason the Germans don’t finish the job and leave 2 Yugo inf alive (Germany retreats) you would just place 2 chips in Yugo so you know how many units they still have. Although these 2 units are still there they aren’t allowed to move so you would not use UK inf (use the chips). However if on UK’s turn they non combat move a ground unit into Yugo they would get the 2 Yugo inf (replace the chips with UK inf). See next example for more on bringing a pro to your side neutral into your camp.

Example, Germany activating a pro axis neutral:
On G1 you may want to activate the pro-axis territories of Finland and Bulgaria (both have 4 inf silhouetted on the map). You would non combat move (NCM) a German ground unit (not AA gun) into those territories, and place 4 German inf in each to represent the standing army that the Germans gain. You don’t need a neutral color because you will use German inf. You also would claim the income for the territories that you control.

The same thing goes for all the powers. Italy may attack pro-allied Greece on their first turn. The UK may activate pro-allied Persia during the NCM to gain the 2 inf there (would need to transport a ground unit to Persia). So you really don’t need neutral inf to play the game, because you can use chips in the rare cases when a neutral is activated and not wiped out. Plus most of the pro axis/allied neutrals will be decided early in the game. Even the strict neutrals can easily be identified, and once they are attacked you can use the same as above.

I know you are looking for oob, but the last time I played we changed the Med set-up. This is based on the fact that I hate the way that the UK can lose every BB on the map before her first turn (both sides), and how Italy gets smoked in the first round as well. Also considered is that the allies are getting 20+ IPC bids.

The way things are oob, If the UK doesn’t hit the Italian fleet, then they need to either waste ships blocking out the Italians so they can’t hit the Alex fleet (sz98), or vacate the MED all together (which is something that would never have happen). So I wanted the Italians to get a pass on the first turn, but wanted the UK to have enough ships (def strength) to stay in the Med and withstand a hit from the Italians on Ita1 if UK decides to stay in the Med.

Re-set:
Italy, I moved the Italian cruiser from sz97 to sz 99, I then gave the Italians a dd in sz 97.

UK, I gave them a dd in sz92, and a BB and SS in sz 98.

The DD’s off set, so the UK is getting 26 IPCs in units (BB and SS).

This set-up blocks the UK from hitting the Italian sz97 fleet unless they want even odds using the new sz98 SS (which can slide past the cruiser in sz99) and just about all their air power (something that probably won’t happen). I only played it once, but the UK and Italy exchange some blocks and played some cat & mouse. I think that the axis ended up attacking the UK sz98 fleet in the 3rd turn, but Italy lost its Med fleet attacking it, and it cost the Germans a couple planes too (UK had built an AB for Egypt). All in all it seemed to make the Med pretty interesting (different), but again it was only one game.

I assume having Kwangsi starting as a Chinese held territory has authentic flavor so that’s ok in my book. I will say that it changes some of the Japanese strats though because Kwangsi is often a J1 landing spot for the Japanese airforce. They would still be able to take it J1, and build AB/NB J2 for a possible J3 hit on India though.

I like reducing most of the Chinese territories to 0 with exception of the 3 territories you have listed (plus Kwangsi) taking 9 IPCs out of China. I’m ok with the Chinese getting 4 inf per turn instead of holding IPCs and buying units (more of an AA50 theme). I would however have it be that China receives 1 inf per territory they hold up to 4 inf max per turn (these would be the territories that the Chinese start the game with). If they fall to 3 territories they get 3 inf, 2 ter-2 inf, 1 ter-1inf, 0 ter-no inf. I would also give China 1 free inf for every Chinese territory liberated from Japan that China holds when it’s turn starts (Chinese territory occupied by Japan at the start of the game).  This is a bit more in line to China’s buying abilities in G40 IMO.

To simulate the Burma road bonus:

If the Burma Road is open at the end of China’s turn they get one free inf to place with the rest of thier units (they would normally get 6 IPC’). So if the Burma road is open, or they open it on their turn China could potentially get 5 units to mobilize depending on how many territories they hold (or more if they also have liberated some original Japanese occupied territories).

If the Burma road is open when China starts it’s turn, when they get their free units, they can swap up to 2 inf for art. These would still be placed at the end of their turn.

I have thought about integrating some of the rules and units into the other AA games, but haven’t done it. I have AA42 2nd edition, but have only played it a handful of times. I did play the anniversary edition a bunch before G40 came out, and have often though it would be cool to introduce some of the G40 stuff to it.

I think you could bring in the new units, and come up with placement of AB/NB, but the facilities would need to be nerfed. Like you could have AB and NB, but don’t get a movement bonus because of the smaller maps. AB could allow scramble, but limit it to 1 plane only. NB would only be used for repairing capital ships.

I agree with Shadow about tech being a possible game breaker. The big thing about oob tech is you can invest heavily, but come out with nothing, or a lucky roll gives you the game (oob really sucks IMO). If you are going to mandate tech into the game though, then I would integrate it into the game over a couple turns, not from the start.

I think that if you give each power a break-thru to then roll for a tech, it levels the playing field some, because every power would get something (most get two), instead of one power gets the key to victory because of a lucky break-thru roll. With most powers getting two techs they should get something useful to their cause.

I also think that the entire tech chart should be open for each power, I’m just not too sure that they should be allowed to pick because that might be too much of an advantage. Considering that the allies will be getting more tech because they simply have more powers should also be looked at.

Looks like freh beat me to it, but……

1. Yes, the Japanese invading the Dutch territory would also allow the US to enter the war at the beginning of the next US turn. The y can DOW all the axis powers.

2&3) You are correct it means for the powers turn, not the entire round.

4. During your combat move phase your planes have to fly off the carriers and move to the sz that you are attacking (you can’t move your carriers then lift you planes). Then you can either bring your carriers into the battle, or wait until the non combat move phase to pick them up. If your carrier goes into battle with an allies plane then it would be considered cargo.

4b) Your attaching planes would get the remainder of their movement to find a safe landing place if your carrier is damaged or sunk.

5. Funny a similar question just came up on a different thread.

Taken from page 18 of the Euro rule book (2nd edition). Under step 3 land combat first paragraph

“If there was no sea battle, or the sea zone has been cleared of all defending enemy units except transports and submarines that submerged during the sea battle, and the attacker still has land units committed to the coastal territory, move all attacking and defending units to the battle strip and conduct combat……”

6. Yes a surprise strike could kill a ship (like a cruiser, and it wouldn’t return fire), but keep in mind some ships take 2 hits to kill (carriers and battleships).

Hope this helps, happy gaming.

Not a problem, it happens to me too. You actually had me doubting myself thinking I either missed, forgot or just had a preconceived notion lol.  I read and re-read a dozen pages in the G40 Euro rule book between our posts before I finally found it.

Instead of giving a couple weapons development to each power from the start that would greatly effect the opening round, would you consider giving them a free break-thru on turn 2 and turn 3 according to the turn order to bring weapons in as the game goes on (Italy and Anz only get it on turn 2). So on R2 Russia gets a free break-thru and can either choose its weapon like you said, or you could have them roll a dice, then choose the weapon that corresponds to the roll from either chart (get two to pick from). You could eliminate weapon’s as they get taken, or allow overlap (up to you). �

You could still allow each power to buy development dice starting on the first turn and try to get a break-thru for 3 IPCs each.

@Marshmallow:

Unless he brings a destroyer, he can’t force the enemy sub to participate in the defense. The amphibious assault then fails unless he brings a surface warship with a combat value. The presence of the sub, submerged or not, prevents the amphibious assault.

On the other hand, if his opponent lets the sub participate in the defense, then yeah, it can die.

I’m sorry but this is not true Marsh, a submerged sub will not stop the amphib. Look on page 18 of the Euro rule book (2nd edition). Under step 3 land combat first paragraph (I know this is a strange place for it because it took me a while to find it).

“If there was no sea battle, or the sea zone has been cleared of all defending enemy units except transports and submarines that submerged during the sea battle, and the attacker still has land units committed to the coastal territory, move all attacking and defending units to the battle strip and conduct combat……”

Maybe you are thinking about not being able to ignore subs with out escorting your tpts with a war ship, but it says war ship, not surface warship so you could use a sub to escort if you want to.

@Marshmallow:

@WILD:

I’m assuming that you are attacking a Japanese territory (island) that has Kamikaze’s. That is why you are reluctant to take in your surface war ships. Just as a note Kami’s can’t hit subs or tpts, so if you had 2-3 subs in the attack with your tpts he wouldn’t be able to use his Kami’s, and he might submerge his sub. If he stays he defends at 1, and your subs would have a good chance of killing his sub and destroyer. I would only do this if I also had air power to insure I could take out his scramblers (and destroyer if the subs miss).

Yeah, but he still couldn’t land his troops for the amphibious assault if he took in just subs.

Marsh

Sure he can if he clears the sz and kills the defending ftr, dd and ss (or kills the dd & ftr and the sub submerges). You don’t need a surface warship to perform an amphib, you just need to clear the sz. There is a good possibility of clearing the sz with a couple subs and 3-4 planes. Even if the attacker loses both subs, as long as the defender lost all 3 units the amphib goes on (sz is cleared).

I’m assuming that you are attacking a Japanese territory (island) that has Kamikaze’s. That is why you are reluctant to take in your surface war ships. Just as a note Kami’s can’t hit subs or tpts, so if you had 2-3 subs in the attack with your tpts he wouldn’t be able to use his Kami’s, and he might submerge his sub. If he stays he defends at 1, and your subs would have a good chance of killing his sub and destroyer. I would only do this if I also had air power to insure I could take out his scramblers (and destroyer if the subs miss).