Summer 1941

[Emperor_Taiki]

Maybe nobody cares but I just wanted to point out in case you did not know the 1941 scenario more resbles the situation of summer 1941 more than spring 1941

the reasons I can pick out are as follows

Italian East Africa was not conquered by the British until April 1941 and at the begining of spring their were still 300,000 Italian soldeirs stationed there.

Yugoslavia and Greece were still neutral in the spring, and were not invaded by the Germans until April, while Crete was not taken until June

The British did not invade Iran until August 1941

Brazil did not join the war until 1943

Russia is usally attacked on the first turn, and if each turn represents 3-4 months, summer makes more sence


I am sure their are other reasons these just seem to be the most obvious

[WOPR]

Also the battleship Bizmarck was on the prowl in May 1941, yet the Germans have no BB in the spring 41 setup! 

[Imperious Leader]

The game starts about June 20th 1941 the last day of spring and just before Barbarossa. So no Bismarck and everything is fine.

[WOPR]

I suppose you're right, but I still want a German BB. I just think it would make the N. Atlantic much more interesting. The allies would still dominate that theater but it would at least give the Germans a few more gameplay options.

[rockrobinoff]

I suppose you're right, but I still want a German BB. I just think it would make the N. Atlantic much more interesting. The allies would still dominate that theater but it would at least give the Germans a few more gameplay options.

I think these game play options are already there. You have the opportunity to sink the lions share of the british navy, and make a naval build of your own, if you think that is the way to go.

[WOPR]

You have the opportunity to sink the lions share of the british navy

I certainly agree with you with on that part. The second part, however, not so much. When playing Germany I don't see any naval units as a good investment. They're just too easily and quickly sunk by the UK and allies.

If Germany had a BB though, on G1 you could purchase a CV and a pair of DDs and have a formidable little fleet. Without the BB, the CV and DDs aren't so scary.

In the end though, the setup is not going to change so I'll have to keep my German naval aspirations in check.

[Gallo Rojo]

I suppose you're right, but I still want a German BB. I just think it would make the N. Atlantic much more interesting. The allies would still dominate that theater but it would at least give the Germans a few more gameplay options.

Two ideas I'm implementing with a friend:
Transform German Cruisers into "Pocket Battleships" (Graff Spee class): attack and defend on a 3, but take 2 hits to sunk (they still cost the same than a Cruiser)
Apply modified revised national characteristic to German subs: 3 Germans subs are a 'wolf-pack'... if there are enemy destroyers, 1 Destroyer cancels 2 Subs especial abilities (but 3rd sub on the 'pack' still has her sneak first shoot attack)

note: we're combining those German advantages with some other house rules:

- Italians and Japanese can only produce light-armor: light armor cost 5, move 2, attack and defend on a 2
- US and UK tanks attack on a 3, but defend on a 2 (still cost 5)
- Only German and Soviets tanks attack and defend on a 3

- Soviet Infantry, when defending a City, is artillery supported: all infantry matched with an artillery defends on a 3 (artillery still rolls on a 2)

- Japanese fighters moves 5 instead of 4 (they're zeros, they were long range from the beginning)
- Japanese troops defending a Japanese island defends on 3

- US Cruisers move 3... alternatively, US Carriers may move 3

[Imperious Leader]

Thats good rules.

[WOPR]

Those rules sound pretty cool actually. It would be interesting to play a game like that, however I usually prefer stick to what's official.

[Krieghund]

Transform German Cruisers into "Pocket Battleships" (Graff Spee class): attack and defend on a 3, but take 2 hits to sunk (they still cost the same than a Cruiser)

Pocket battleships were actually more heavily armed than cruisers, but less heavily armored than battleships.  Based upon that, it seems that a pocket battleship should actually attack and defend on a 4 (like a battleship) and take only one hit to sink (like a cruiser), not the other way around.

[Imperious Leader]

Pocket battleships were actually more heavily armed than cruisers, but less heavily armored than battleships.  Based upon that, it seems that a pocket battleship should actually attack and defend on a 4 (like a battleship) and take only one hit to sink (like a cruiser), not the other way around.

I find it impossible to arrive at this conclusion...

More heavy armor = 2 hits to sink
Small caliber guns than a battleship= 3-3

They had smaller guns than a battleship or they would not be able to carry the turrets. These were basically really heavy cruisers with larger guns

[Krieghund]

Let's do the numbers:

Bismarck class battleship armor: belt 145-320 mm, deck 110-120 mm
Deutschland class pocket battleship armor: belt 80 mm, deck 40 mm
Admiral Hipper class heavy cruiser armor: belt 70-80 mm, deck 20-50 mm

From this, it sure looks to me like the pocket battleship's armor is a lot closer to the cruiser's than the battleship's.

[Black_Elk]

Who cares about the numbers or the historical timeline?

We all know that the game is essentially anachronous and abstract. Trying to figure out a correct ratio between turns and dates is pointless. The best we're ever going to get is a loose approximation anyway, so it might as well be designed around the gameplay.

-The Germans should have had a battleship in sz 5 to make their naval game more fun, especially in 1941, and even more especially because the Regia Marina is no longer under German control. I don't like specific rules that only effect a single unit, battle, or territory on the board. Germany should just have a battleship straight up, for good gameplay.

-The Italians should have started in East Africa, so we could give them the extra ipc, and to make that part of the map more interesting in 1941. They should control Greece and Yugoslavia for basically the same reason.

-Brazil should be under American control, so that the South American continent isn't completely irrelevant. Though honestly if you're going to let them control Brazil, then why not Colombia as well?

Also, while I'm at it... units should not have been co-located in the same territory at the beginning of the game (Libya/UK). Why break with tradition on that after all this time? We could have just as easily given Germany another transport, or some more tanks in Algeria. Or better yet, why not put an extra space in Africa? Oh well, map changes are beyond us at this point.

To be completely blunt, the Anniversary Edition has made me re-evaluate many aspects of this game, which I used to think were intentional, but which now seem rather arbitrary. The distribution of IPCs across the board primarily, but also other stuff as well. The ratio of units to real world armies, the relationship between factories and production, the map projection itself, and the various rationales for including some territories but leaving others out. Basically just a lot of things which I used to accept as dogmatic, because of some grand design necessity, but which now seem open to question.

Oh yeah and you didn't mention Finland for 41, but who cares right? 

[Imperious Leader]

Let's do the numbers:

Bismarck class battleship armor: belt 145-320 mm, deck 110-120 mm
Deutschland class pocket battleship armor: belt 80 mm, deck 40 mm
Admiral Hipper class heavy cruiser armor: belt 70-80 mm, deck 20-50 mm

From this, it sure looks to me like the pocket battleship's armor is a lot closer to the cruiser's than the battleship's.

LMFAO!!

...and although their displacement was that of a heavy cruiser, they were armed with guns larger than the heavy cruisers of other nations.

Yea lets do the numbers, except not compare a super dreadnought in the same navy with its own pocket battleship. Instead we compare the pocket battleship to normal warships that could be opposing it ( from England)


HMS Exeter ( Heavy cruiser)
# Main belt
    * 3 in
    * 2½-1 in enclosing bulkheads

# Lower deck
    * 1¼ in over machinery
    * 1½ in over stearing gear

county class cruiser
Main belt:

    * 4.5 in with 1 in closing bulkheads (Berwick, Cumberland, Suffolk, Kent & Cornwall only, from 1935-)

Lower deck:

    * 1.25 in over machinery
    * 1.5 in over steering gear


Admiral Graf Spee:
belt:  about 3.937 inches--- compared to 3 inches for uk
deck:  1.5 inches-3.5 inches--- compared to equal to double uk cruisers

King George V class BB...basically the top of the line Battleship for UK
Main belt: 14.7 in
lower belt: 5.4 in
deck: up to 5.38 in

Kongo Class battleship ( just for example)
deck: 2.3–1.5 in
belt: 8–3 in

OK based on this the German ships should be one hit, but at 4-4 and not 3-3