• Sponsor

    What can be done to prevent German players from deploying a “Dark Skies” strategy? I don’t want to see it abolished altogether, but there should be something to slow down this gimmicky gambit.

    I’ll get it started with the following ideas…

    • Bombers conducting SBRs only receive a +2 damage bonus if they have departed from an operational airbase
    • During air battles with interceptors, roll 1 dice @1 per bomber formation instead of 1 dice @1 per bomber.
    • All hits from an air defence of any kind must be applied to participating strategic bombers first.
  • '17 '16

    Good idea to open a thread on this issue.

    I see one situation which is not really adressed: a swarm of StBs attacking a naval fleet.
    All defender’s hits directly affects the StBs.
    As far as I understand, Dark Skies is a big detterent against US fleet moving to Gibraltar SZ.
    US player wait longer to build up a lot of Carrier and planes.

    What was suggested in previous discussion was a drastic overhaul:
    StB A3-4 D1 M6-7 cost 12, pairing 1:1 with Fg gives +1 Attack.
    TcB A4 D3 M4-5 cost 11, no need for combined arms.

    Do you see some flaws in this change?

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    What can be done to prevent German players from deploying a “Dark Skies” strategy?

    • All hits from an air defence of any kind must be applied to participating strategic bombers first.

    Can you explain YG what you have in mind and provides a few examples to better see what issue this one correct, please.


    If I correctly understand your idea, in SBR, Strategic Bombers are always first target even if TcBs are part of this air raid. But, you left the owner decide between Fighter or TacB casualty.

    In regular combat, AAA hits must be allocated to Strategic Bombers first.
    TcBs or Fighters casualties are up to the owner.

    I’m not sure about this one, if it is intended:
    Also, in regular combat, any defending Fighters or TcBs hits rolled must be allocated to attacking StBs first.

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    What can be done to prevent German players from deploying a “Dark Skies” strategy? I don’t want to see it abolished altogether, but there should be something to slow down this gimmicky gambit.

    I’ll get it started with the following ideas…

    • During air battles with interceptors, roll 1 dice @1 per bomber formation instead of 1 dice @1 per bomber.

    A variant of SBR attack for StBs I suggested the first time Dark Skies has appeared was:
    1 StB gets up to 1 attack @1 per interceptor, which ever the lesser.
    Same mechanics as AA gun but without preemptive roll.

    4 StBs attacking 1 Fg interceptor, you get only 1 attack roll @1.
    4 StBs attacking 5 Fgs, you get 4 attack rolls @1.

    @Young:

    • During air battles with interceptors, roll 1 dice @1 per bomber formation instead of 1 dice @1 per bomber.
    • All hits from an air defence of any kind must be applied to participating strategic bombers first.

    Those two put together would be a detterrent for SBR (which is not so popular)  but will not solve Dark Skies issues  in regular battles.


  • I would not play arround with the cost and the abillity of the Bmbrs.
    I would rather consider a change of Naval surface ships abillities like:

    CR’s and BB’s have the ability of AA guns for one round.
    After that regular combat.

    What do you think?


  • SBR only D6. Interceptors defend at 2.

    Against Navy, a Bomber only gets a 2, unless paired with any other unit, then it is a 4. This on a one to one Basis.

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    Yeah, I see the issue being more with the combat advantage of bombers vs Allied fleets rather than an SBR issue. The fact that the bombers can stall Allied fleet development off Europe and then turn around a bomb Russia without mercy exacerbates things, but it’s the threat against the sea and expeditionary fleets that seems to be the real hang up. I’ve heard some different suggestion that would probably work, but it would nice if we could find just one rules change to handle it. I think a naval unit change might have less impact overall than a change to the bomber unit itself, and be a little easier to isolate the effects of the change. It would be a bummer for example if a change to the bomber fixed the dark skies with G, only to screw the American bomber strategies in the process, since cheap overppwered bombers are one of the few things America has going for it haha


  • I kind like wittman"s idea. Bombers shouldn’t get A4 against naval. They should get A2 only against naval.  I always felt bombers had to high of attack values against naval.
    1 to 1 bases with a fig then A3 at naval.
    I’d keep it simple.
    If you keep it A4 at naval then give Cruisers and Battleships AA shot’s for 1 round only at bombers do to there slower moves.

  • '17 '16

    @aequitas:

    I would not play arround with the cost and the abillity of the Bmbrs.
    I would rather consider a change of Naval surface ships abillities like:

    CR’s and BB’s have the ability of AA guns for one round.
    After that regular combat.

    What do you think?

    I play with 1 preemptive AA shots per Cruiser and Battleship.
    It is not enough IMO.

    I like this new idea from Wittmann of a basic A2 boost to A4 if paired 1:1 with 1 Fg or 1 TcB.
    Better reflect some limitations of Bomber, specially against Naval.

    In my mind this gives:
    StB A2-4 D1 M6-7 cost 12, pairing 1:1 with Fg or TcB gives +2 Attack.
    TcB A4 D3 M4-5 cost 11, no need for combined arms.


    I forgot, but I also suggested these straighter ones, no combined arms:
    STRATEGIC BOMBER
    12 IPCs A3 D2 M6 +1M with AB
    SBR Damage 1D6+2

    TACTICAL BOMBER
    11 IPCs A4 D3 M4 +1M with AB
    TBR damage 1D6

    @Baron:

    @theROCmonster:

    That’s understandable. If they changed bombers to 2 attack than the way defense rules work on Strategic bombing runs would be fine. Have Strategic bombers be used for bombing more than threat projection. They still can have threat projection because of their range, but they wouldn’t be the god unit they are now.

    In that case, I would live with a more strategic target oriented bomber:

    Tactical Bomber
    Attack 4
    Defense 3
    Move 4 +1 with AB
    Cost 12
    TBR dmg: 1D6
    Attack 1

    Strategic Bomber:
    Attack 2
    Defense 2
    Move 6 +1 with AB
    Cost 12
    SBR dmg : 2D6
    Attack 1

    Fighter
    Attack 3
    Defense 4
    Move 4 +1 with AB
    Cost 10
    SBR:
    Attack 2
    Defense 2

  • '17 '16

    @wittmann:

    SBR only D6. Interceptors defend at 2.

    Against Navy, a Bomber only gets a 2, unless paired with any other unit, then it is a 4. This on a one to one Basis.

    Do you mean that Strategic Bomber attack at 4 in regular combat vs ground units, but only Attack @2 when attacking units in SZ?

    Such a drastic change in SBRs will deters them too much.
    At least, keep 1D+2 damage.

    Using regularkid’s HR playing escort A2 and intercept D2 is nearer the razor edge between no SBR or no intercept.


    However, I know that maths are goods with YG suggestion to better balance StBs vs interceptors.

    • 1 dice @1 per bomber formation against 1 @1 per Fighter is better than regularkid’s SBR.
      Less attrition on defending side, defender more willing to commit interceptors and attacker StB is only facing @1 defense, makes for around 2/6 being destroyed.

    However, the maths I made were for a A0 bomber with D6+3 damage.
    I suggest to keep D6+2 in all situations, not just when starting from AB.
    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35883.msg1409122#msg1409122


    Summary: StB A0 damage: 1D6**+3**, Fg A1 D1
    1 Strategic Bomber doing SBR against no interceptor
    Sum: + 5.417 - 2 = +3.417 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 4.514 - 3.667 = + 0.847 IPC. damage/SBR run

    1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 3.762 - 5.056 = - 1.294 IPC. damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 6.933 - 5.334 = + 1.599 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 3 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 3.762 - 5.056 = - 1.294 IPC. damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 9.027 - 7.334 = + 1.693 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 7.084 - 3.667 = + 3.417 IPC damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 9.930 - 5.666 = + 4.264 IPCs damage/SBR run


    Summary:
    1942.2 SBR HRules with StB A0 and Fg A1 D1 : damage 1D6+2

    1 Strategic Bomber doing SBR against no interceptor
    Sum: + 4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC. damage/SBR run

    1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 3.183 - 5.056 = - 1.873 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 6.123 - 5.334 = + 0.789 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 3 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 3.183 - 5.056 = - 1.873 IPC. damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 7.639 - 7.334 = + 0.305 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 6.250 - 3.667 = + 2.583 IPC damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 8.403 - 5.666 = + 2.737 IPCs damage/SBR run
    The maths for 1D6+2 and @0 StBs were insert in this thread:
    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35614.msg1391990#msg1391990

    G1940 OOB SBR:
    1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
    Sum: +4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 against 1 Fg D1
    Sum: + 5.486 - 3.667 = + 1.819 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: + 4.85 - 5.056 = - 0.206 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: +7.775 - 5.33 = + 2.445 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 StBs A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: +10.973 - 7.334 = + 3.639 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D1
    Sum: + 7.639 - 3.667 = + 3.972 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 StBs A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D1
    Sum: +11.459 - 5.666 = + 5.793 IPCs damage/SBR run


    The original post is this one:
    @Baron:

    Down below here is a completly different way of doing SBR for 1942.2

    Strategic Bomber in air-to-air combat SBR:
    Attack 0
    Bombard IC damage: 1D6+2

    Fighter in air-to-air combat SBR:
    Attack 1
    Defend 1

    IC’s AAA: @1 against each Strategic Bomber


    1942.2 SBR HRules with StB A0 and Fg A1 D1 : damage 1D6+2

    1 Strategic Bomber doing SBR against no interceptor

    AAA roll = odds casualties

    5/6 StB survived * 5.5 IPCs = +4.583 IPCs
    1/6 StB killed *12 IPCs = -2 IPCs

    Sum: + 4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR run


    1 Strategic Bomber Att 0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor Def 1

    Interceptor Fg roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

    1/66/6 = 6/36 1 StB killed by Fg
    5/6
    1/6 = 5/36 1 StB killed by AAA
    5/6*5/6 = 25/36 No casualty at all.

    Results:
    Bombard on IC 25/36* ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 3.819 IPCs
    StB killed 11/36 *-12 IPCs = - 3.667 IPCs
    Sum: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC. damage/SBR run


    1 Strategic Bomber Att 0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors Def 1

    Interceptors Fgs roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

    11/366/6 = 66/216 1 StB killed by Fg
    25/36
    1/6 = 25/216 1 StB killed by AAA
    25/36*5/6 = 125/216 No casualty at all.

    Results:
    Bombard on IC 125/216* ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 3.183 IPCs
    StB killed 91/216 *-12 IPCs = - 5.056 IPCs
    Sum: + 3.183 - 5.056 = - 1.873 IPC. damage/SBR run


    1 Fighter Att 1 and 1 Strategic Bomber Att 0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors Def 1

    Fighter roll/interceptors Fgs roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

    1/61/366/6 = 6/1296 1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fgs vs 1 Fg
    1/610/361/6= 10/1296 1 Fg killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
    1/610/365/6= 50/1296 1 Fg killed by Fg vs 1 Fg
    1/625/361/6 = 25/1296 1 StB killed by AAA
    1/625/365/6 = 125/1296 No casualty vs 1 Fg

    5/620/366/6 = 600/1296 1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fg vs no casualty
    5/616/361/6 = 80/1296 1 Fg killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
    5/616/365/6 = 400/1296 no casualty at all

    Results:
    Bombard on IC: 1050/1296 * ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 4.456 IPCs
    Killing 1 Fg: 216/1296 +10 IPCs = + 1.667 IPCs
    Fg killed: 300/1296
    -10 IPCs = - 2.315 IPCs
    StB killed: 150/1296*-12 IPCs = - 1.389IPCs
    StB & Fg killed: 96/1296*-22 IPCs = - 1.630 IPCs

    Sum: + 6.123 - 5.334 = + 0.789 IPC damage/SBR run


    1 Fighter Att 1 and 1 Strategic Bomber Att 0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor Def 1

    Fighter roll/interceptor Fg roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

    1/61/61/6= 1/216 1 Fg killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
    1/61/65/6= 5/216 1 Fg killed by Fg vs 1 Fg
    1/65/61/6 = 5/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
    1/65/65/6 = 25/216 No casualty vs 1 Fg

    5/61/61/6 = 5/216 1 Fg killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
    5/61/65/6 = 25/216 1 Fg killed by Fg vs no casualty
    5/65/61/6 = 25/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
    5/65/65/6 = 125/216 no casualty at all

    Results:
    Bombard on IC: 180/216 * ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 4.583 IPCs
    Killing 1 Fg: 36/216 +10 IPCs = + 1.667 IPCs
    Fg killed:30/216
    -10 IPCs = - 1.389 IPCs
    StB killed: 30/216*-12 IPCs = - 1.667 IPCs
    StB & Fg killed: 6/216*-22 IPCs = - 0.611 IPC

    Sum: + 6.250 - 3.667 = + 2.583 IPC damage/SBR run


    2 Strategic Bombers Att 0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors Def 1

    Interceptor Fgs roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

    1/3636/36= 36/1296 2 StBs killed by Fgs
    10/36
    6/36 = 60/1296 1 StB killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA
    10/6*30/36= 300/1296 1 StB killed by Fg

    25/361/36 = 25/1296 2 StBs killed by AAA
    25/36
    10/36 = 250/1296 1 StB killed by AAA
    25/36*25/36 = 625/1296 No casualty at all.

    Results:
    2x Bombard on IC 625/1296* ((2+4)+(12+4) IPCs)/2= +11 IPCs) = +5.305 IPCs
    1x Bombard on IC 550/1296* ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 2.334 IPCs
    2 StBs killed 121/1296*-24 IPCs = - 2.241 IPCs
    1 StB killed 550/1296*-12 IPCs = - 5.093 IPCs
    Sum: + 7.639 - 7.334 = + 0.305 IPCs damage/SBR run


    2 Strategic Bombers Att 0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor Def 1

    Interceptor Fg roll/ AAA roll = odds casualties

    1/66/36 = 6/216 1 StB killed by Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA
    1/6
    30/36= 30/216 1 StB killed by Fg
    5/61/36 = 5/216 2 StBs killed by AAA
    5/6
    10/36 = 50/216 1 StB killed by AAA
    5/6*25/36 = 125/216 No casualty at all.

    Results:
    2x Bombard on IC 125/216* ((2+4)+(12+4) IPCs)/2= +11 IPCs) = +6.366 IPCs
    1x Bombard on IC 80/216* ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 2.037 IPCs
    2 StBs killed 11/216*-24 IPCs = - 1.222 IPC
    1 StB killed 80/216*-12 IPCs = - 4.444 IPCs
    Sum: + 8.403 - 5.666 = + 2.737 IPCs damage/SBR run


    Summary:
    1 Strategic Bomber doing SBR against no interceptor
    Sum: + 4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC. damage/SBR run

    1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 3.183 - 5.056 = - 1.873 IPC. damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 6.123 - 5.334 = + 0.789 IPC damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    Sum: + 7.639 - 7.334 = + 0.305 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 6.250 - 3.667 = + 2.583 IPC damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    Sum: + 8.403 - 5.666 = + 2.737 IPCs damage/SBR run


    Comparison of this HR with Triple A SBR for 1942.2

    1942.2 SBR HRules with StB A0 and Fg A1 D1 : damage 1D6+2   Triple A SBR for 1942.2: damage 1D6

    1 Strategic Bomber doing SBR against no interceptor             1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
    Sum: + 4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR run                Sum: +2.917 - 2 = +0.917 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1     1 StB A1 against 1 Fg D1
    Sum: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC. damage/SBR run        Sum: +3.69 - 3.667 = + 0.023 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1       1 StB A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: + 3.183 - 5.056 = - 1.873 IPC. damage/SBR run              Sum: + 2.025 - 5.056 = - 3.031 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1       1 StB & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: + 6.123 - 5.334 = + 0.789 IPC damage/SBR run              Sum: +6.155 - 5.33 = + 0.825 IPC damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1         2 StBs A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: + 7.639 - 7.334 = + 0.305 IPCs damage/SBR run              Sum: +8.195 - 7.334 = + 0.861 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 Fighter A1 and 1 Strategic Bomber A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1       1 StB & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D1
    Sum: + 6.250 - 3.667 = + 2.583 IPC damage/SBR run         Sum: + 5.973 - 3.667 = + 2.306 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1         2 StBs A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D1
    Sum: + 8.403 - 5.666 = + 2.737 IPCs damage/SBR run         Sum: +8.403 - 5.666 = + 2.737 IPCs damage/StB

  • '17 '16

    @aequitas:

    I would not play around with the cost and the abillity of the Bombers.
    I would rather consider a change of Naval surface ships abilities like:

    CR’s and BB’s have the ability of AA guns for one round.
    After that regular combat.

    What do you think?

    Here is an idea along this line of thinking:

    TRANSPORT
    7 IPCs A0 D0 *AA1 M2-3 (NB), 1 hit, taken last as casualty
    Carry 2 units, 1 Inf + 1 any ground unit
    No defense against warships,
    Beginning on the second round, 1 Transport can escape from Naval Battle in the same SZ at each end of combat round, if there is no enemy’s aircraft.
    Simply remove TP from battle board and place it in the same SZ on the map.

    *Regular AA @1 against up to 1 plane each combat round, whichever the lesser.

    Maybe this can fit the bill?
    @Black_Elk:

    Yeah, I see the issue being more with the combat advantage of bombers vs Allied fleets rather than an SBR issue. The fact that the bombers can stall Allied fleet development off Europe and then turn around a bomb Russia without mercy exacerbates things, but it’s the threat against the sea and expeditionary fleets that seems to be the real hang up. I’ve heard some different suggestion that would probably work, but it would nice if we could find just one rules change to handle it. I think a naval unit change might have less impact overall than a change to the bomber unit itself, and be a little easier to isolate the effects of the change. It would be a bummer for example if a change to the bomber fixed the dark skies with G, only to screw the American bomber strategies in the process, since cheap overppwered bombers are one of the few things America has going for it haha

  • Sponsor

    @BM,

    You obviously have analyzed this issue, lets not make cases for all ideas for a moment… in your opinion, what is the issue with bombers that makes Dark Skies problematic for balance, and in your opinion… what is the best solution to fix the issue?


  • What is Dark Skies?

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    @BM,

    You obviously have analyzed this issue, lets not make cases for all ideas for a moment… in your opinion, what is the issue with bombers that makes Dark Skies problematic for balance, and in your opinion… what is the best solution to fix the issue?

    2 points need to be fix IMO: SBR and mainly regular combat with naval units.

    Your SBR rules seems to me the simplest fix while not too much affecting the casualty rate on each side. I collected the datas to create a summary table, yet to be done, for your approach with bomber group attacking with a single @1, IDK for sure if 1D6+2 is enough incentive.

    I believe the Defenseless TP is the problem in the Atlantic.
    To protect them from the projecting power of Germans StBs, it requires a lot of CVs, DDs and Fgs.
    The TP suggested above is my main idea, which is open for debate.

    EDIT: Here is the post which contains a summary table for this SBR houserule:
    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37418.msg1508629#msg1508629

  • Sponsor

    @Baron:

    @Young:

    @BM,

    You obviously have analyzed this issue, lets not make cases for all ideas for a moment… in your opinion, what is the issue with bombers that makes Dark Skies problematic for balance, and in your opinion… what is the best solution to fix the issue?

    2 points need to ne fix IMO: SBR and mainly regular combat with naval units.

    Your SBR rules seems to me the simplest fix while not too much affecting the casualty rate on each side. I collected the datas to create a summary table, yet to be done, for your approach with bomber group attacking with a single @1, IDK for sure if 1D6+2 is enough incentive.

    I believe the Defenseless TP is the problem in the Atlantic.
    To protect them from the projecting power of StBs, it requires a lot of CVs, DDs and Fgs.
    The TP suggested above is my opening idea open for discussion.

    Whats the TP suggestion again?

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    @Baron:

    @Young:

    @BM,

    You obviously have analyzed this issue, lets not make cases for all ideas for a moment… in your opinion, what is the issue with bombers that makes Dark Skies problematic for balance, and in your opinion… what is the best solution to fix the issue?

    2 points need to ne fix IMO: SBR and mainly regular combat with naval units.

    Your SBR rules seems to me the simplest fix while not too much affecting the casualty rate on each side. I collected the datas to create a summary table, yet to be done, for your approach with bomber group attacking with a single @1, IDK for sure if 1D6+2 is enough incentive.

    I believe the Defenseless TP is the problem in the Atlantic.
    To protect them from the projecting power of StBs, it requires a lot of CVs, DDs and Fgs.
    The TP suggested above is my opening idea open for discussion.

    Whats the TP suggestion again?

    TRANSPORT
    7 IPCs A0 D0 *AA1 M2-3 (NB), 1 hit, taken last as casualty
    Carry 2 units, 1 Inf + 1 any ground unit
    No defense against warships.

    Beginning on the second round, 1 Transport can escape from Naval Battle in the same SZ at each end of combat round, if there is no enemy’s aircraft.
    Simply remove TP from battle board and place it in the same SZ on the map.

    *Regular AA @1 against up to 1 plane each combat round, whichever the lesser.


  • @Baron:

    TRANSPORT
    7 IPCs A0 D0 *AA1 M2-3 (NB), 1 hit, taken last as casualty
    Carry 2 units, 1 Inf + 1 any ground unit
    No defense against warships.

    Beginning on the second round, 1 Transport can escape from Naval Battle in the same SZ at each end of combat round, if there is no enemy’s aircraft.
    Simply remove TP from battle board and place it in the same SZ on the map.

    *Regular AA @1 against up to 1 plane each combat round, whichever the lesser.

    So, essentially a reverse of the “subs can’t fire at aircraft” thing?  Transports unable to fire at ships?  So a lone transport caught unguarded can conceivably get a one-on-one hit vs an aircraft ala Classic?  Not particularly a fan, but I can see the value.

    I can get behind an opportunity to defend itself, but every round is a bit too much.  If implemented, I’d be more in favor of a one-shot AA at the outset of combat at your ratio of transports vs aircraft whichever is lesser.  And an even/odd chance of individual ships even being able to fire (preparedness/verve roll).  They are transports after all.

    BBs and CAs having an AA shot at the outset is more feasible, being large warships and all…  but only on the defense.  With AA shots on subsequent rounds at the END of the round, if the attacker chooses to press.

    Transports escaping at all is a complete non-starter for me though.  Frankly, they were wallowing pigs on the water, and are helpless in game for a reason.  At least with subs, escape is conceivable due to submerging.

  • '17 '16

    @Aldyn:

    @Baron:

    TRANSPORT
    7 IPCs A0 D0 *AA1 M2-3 (NB), 1 hit, taken last as casualty
    Carry 2 units, 1 Inf + 1 any ground unit
    No defense against warships.

    Beginning on the second round, 1 Transport can escape from Naval Battle in the same SZ at each end of combat round, if there is no enemy’s aircraft.
    Simply remove TP from battle board and place it in the same SZ on the map.

    *Regular AA @1 against up to 1 plane each combat round, whichever the lesser.

    So, essentially a reverse of the “subs can’t fire at aircraft” thing?  Transports unable to fire at ships?  So a lone transport caught unguarded can conceivably get a one-on-one hit vs an aircraft ala Classic?  Not particularly a fan, but I can see the value.

    I can get behind an opportunity to defend itself, but every round is a bit too much.  If implemented, I’d be more in favor of a one-shot AA at the outset of combat at your ratio of transports vs aircraft whichever is lesser.  And an even/odd chance of individual ships even being able to fire (preparedness/verve roll).  They are transports after all.

    Transports escaping at all is a complete non-starter for me though. Frankly, they were wallowing pigs on the water, and are helpless in game for a reason.  At least with subs, escape is conceivable due to submerging.

    In classic times, 1 def@1 per Transport wasn’t so high.
    I experimented this special kind of rule for TP, unable to defend against warships, in World War II The Expansion from Phillip Schwartzer.
    It worked very well indeed.
    The TP suggested above have less power than WWIITE (all TPs get D1 vs plane) regular AA@1 instead and less escaping capacity vs warships (2 rounds of fire, then all unescorted TPs escape), only 1 TP can escape per round after the first two combat rounds of fire, according to the HR I just suggested.
    It is still less than OOB Sub submerge capacity too.

    Besides, the whole point is about how this unit escorted with warships and planes can change the dynamic against a swarm (12 to 20) of Germans Strategic Bombers, not against lonely TP.
    I believe it is the main issue about Dark Skies overwhelming and unrealistic projection of power with 7 moves.

    @MrRoboto:

    The strength of dark sky is not only the damage of bombardment. It is projecting a threat. Buy enough ground troops G1, G2 and G3, after that mostly bombers.

    US can’t build lots of transports, chances are they can’t build any at all. UK can’t build a fleet in the med. UK even needs to reinforce london at some point, since it can fall to even 1 transport, if there are enough bombers behind. Of course Moscow is still doomed. Once moscow falls, germany can either continue via middle east or threaten London heavily.

    At some point, probably after a lot of rounds, though, USA has a fleet big enough to withstand the bomber threat. They can finally move to Gibraltar. They probably have lots of destroyers and carriers, not many transports. What can they do now? whereever they land, the ground troops are immediately killed by 30 bombers. And another problem is that USA very likely don’t have such a large fleet, that they can defend two seazones. So once they move out of Gibraltar, they can’t get reinforcements.

  • '17 '16

    @Aldyn:

    BBs and CAs having an AA shot at the outset is more feasible, being large warships and all…  but only on the defense.  With AA shots on subsequent rounds at the END of the round, if the attacker chooses to press.

    Such addition is virtually like rising Cruiser defense to D4 and Battleship defense to D5.
    Simpler to make the change that way, no need to have a special roll against aircrafts, since there is only StBs attacking by themselves mostly in Dark Skies strategy:

    CRUISER
    A3 D4 M2-3, 1 hit Cost 12

    BATTLESHIP
    A4 D5 M2-3, 2 hits Cost 20

    I don’t see how this can really solve the Dark Skies issue however.

  • '17 '16

    @ChromiumAgeCollector:

    What is Dark Skies?

    @MrRoboto:

    A very important aspect of this game is the concept of “threat”.

    Often times a threat has a bigger effect than actually making the threat true and using units. A good example for this are fighters that can scramble.
    The first three fighters in London for example, are worth double, cause you CAN scramble with them, which means Germany needs to account for them in two ways: In the seazone to secure the landing and again on the land battle. That’s basically a defensive threat.

    Now, bombers are threatening in an offensive way. If you have lots (and I mean high double digits. I’ve had games against Germany players with more than 30 or even 40 bombers) of them stationed in Rome or Berlin, you can threaten a possible US Fleet at Gibraltar, a possible sealion at London, Moscow, Egypt, middle east, a fleet in the med…. everything.

    What happens, is this: USA can’t afford to build transports, since they need to defend against an attack against their fleet. Thus, they will build carriers+fighters every round, without actually moving to Gibraltar.
    Egypt can’t build a fleet for the same reasons. Egypt can’t move the whole ground army to persia / Caucasus either, cause otherwise germany takes egypt with 1 transport and 30 bombers. Also, UK needs to fear for london all the time, since germany can take london too, with 1 transport + lots of bombers. If moscow still stands (unlikely), the russian army is trapped within, so the german army can march on caucasus and the middle east and so on.

    It is not only a very strong strategy, it is possibly the best in the moment.
    I’ve yet struggled to find a viable counter to it, if the Allies didn’t find themselves in a good situation early on (maybe lucky 1st rounds or similar). Usually, going for lots of subs (for convoy) and fighters/bombers yourself seems to work decently enough. KJF (with 100% us attention to japan in the first 4 rounds) might work as well, since starting at round 5, usa can use everything for germany with lots of IPC gained in the pacific.

    What I did as Allies, in some of these games, is not even bothering building an Atlantic fleet with USA (Since that takes A LOT of time!), but rather reinforce the middle east via pacific. Remember, you do not need to win as Allies. All you need to do, is not lose.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

36

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts