San Francisco (ruleset for 1942.2 and Global)

  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    I playtested 3 round with M3 TP and CA.
    I modified set-up to replace half Fg with TcB C10.
    And added 4 UK ICs in Canada, South Africa, East and West Australia.
    Help increase attack factor.
    India was lost third round, but was possible to produce two Destroyers along Madagascar to protect Indian TPs.

    M3 TP makes for immediate attack coming from Japan.

    Game is KGF, not finished but Germany was able to save Baltic fleet.
    Too much U-boat to kill, so Cruiser survived until united with Med BB.

    Probably a bad choice because I attacked Subs with planes and 1 UK DD instead of Cruiser first round.
    Germany use 3 Subs against UK BB to not loose too much air power.
    Missing A4 StB against UK have an impact in this battle.
    To continue…

    Germany bought Carrier first turn, it increase Fg mobility and power projection when near Gibraltar.
    Can reach either Russia, Africa, UK, even North America.
    However, Europe is pretty depleted and only able to built Art & Inf mostly to fight Russia in a corner.
    Slowly loosing Tank to get back Bielorussia, Ukraine.
    Med TP is needed to pour Inf into Africa waiting to use Med Carrier to protect TP near Caucasus.

    India needs to evac toward Persia round 3.
    But, with ICs in Africa, and Australia, UK is still in game.

    I played up to round 5.
    With M3 US Cruiser and TP, I saved Australia from IJN which invaded Western Aus.
    Even if India is lost from J3, all African IC allows to defend all South Africans TTy.
    Both India and Aussie TP allows to move armies around Arabic Peninsula.
    Maybe I don’t play Germany  well because each round I fight for Africa with Inf+Art.
    Too stretched on Eastern front.
    Brazil is German but I lost my combined fleet because USA have many (4-5) DDs around 1 full CV and CA.
    M3 allows US to land 6 units into Finland, Germany have to get ride of them before attacking Russia.
    Japan have to built another IC to really pour units into Asia against Russia.
    Russia was able to get ride of first japan assault, because USA landed into Finland.
    A lot of Bombing and StBs shooted down.

    I also put in set-up a German IC in NWEurope.
    Pretty interesting target and easier to built unit into Atlantic Wall.
    UK invaded it but USA was obliterated in Finland, have to reload home.

    Playing with special Subs, Germany can use Subs because they can submerge after first round.
    I really like to play as I was on boardgame, much more realistic.

    I wonder if Larry never put ICs everywhere because of game length.
    M3 allows for more actions every two rounds.
    Gives a more Global like actions game.
    Fighting over Borneo, Australia, Cairo and NWE.
    Italian TP survive with no escort in Med because there is no StB A4 M6.
    Plane range is much more realistic.

    India retreat UK3 seems working to use all ground units to fight later.
    After 5 rounds, it is still even, Moscow is too far for Germany now while USA and UK are knocking on NWE and France. Luftwaffe is only 3 planes now.
    Japan must be the one which pressure Moscow now.
    G must now play defensive.

    IDK for balance but the game is much more interesting actually, considering  1942.2 lower economy.
    More A1 D1 C5 blockers, always wondering if TcB or Fg need to be purchase none is OP but contextual decision. Germany is able to fight in ATO.

    Even Russia build a third Fg to cover against Axis bombing.
    And succeeded in shooting down 1 G and 1 J bomber.
    But Caucasus is totally maxed out. Stalingrad is contested by Germany, then Japan.
    No one pay to repair.

    If Sinkiang and Szechuan  were considered impassable toward West it clearly slow down game and Axis. It seems more accurate but for now, I didn’t try it.

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    Interesting to hear some experiences with M3!
    :-D

    I think making Western China impassable would work well for 1942.2, no movement between starting Soviet and starting Chinese territories (Sinkiang and Szech closed in the West, but still allows movement through Burma or Manchuria.) If desired you could include a token Red force in Sinkiang, since it’s currently empty. The Territories in this region are highly compressed, so the tile called Sinkiang could be understood to encompass Shensi, where we represent the CCP with a pair of Soviet Infantry, or something along those lines.

    Not sure how well it would work in Global. The need is less pressing there, since Chinese units cannot leave China in G40 the way American units can in 1942.2, but it still might be an option.

  • '17 '16

    @Black_Elk:

    Interesting to hear some experiences with M3!
    :-D

    I think making Western China impassable would work well for 1942.2, no movement between starting Soviet and starting Chinese territories (Sinkiang and Szech closed in the West, but still allows movement through Burma or Manchuria.) If desired you could include a token Red force in Sinkiang, since it’s currently empty. The Territories in this region are highly compressed, so the tile called Sinkiang could be understood to encompass Shensi, where we represent the CCP with a pair of Soviet Infantry, or something along those lines.

    Not sure how well it would work in Global. The need is less pressing there, since Chinese units cannot leave China in G40 the way American units can in 1942.2, but it still might be an option.

    This impassible Western China then should either received a few more units, as you suggested, or an american IC,
    Or both, it may better simulate the high number of Chinese population which take arms.

    Japan has to deal with or it becomes uncontained.

  • '17 '16

    It seems that in mid-game M3 really help USA and somehow UK.
    Once Luftwaffe is out, you can use 2 groups *three TPs from EUSA to NWE or France.
    Germany cannot hold that long.

    And early game, it allows more direct combat involvement.
    No need to foresee two turns ahead, it takes less patience to play US that way.

    South African IC at set-up was very important to block German expansion south of Sahara.
    And it preserved UK economy from falling radically. Keeping it in play against Axis.

    Of course, South Africa’s units clearly benefit from M3.
    It preserved India and Australia TPs, and it increases Inf, Art mobility in Arabic Peninsula.
    Coming faster in Egypt or Persia or Syria.

    So, it seems M3 first is better for IJN then USA and UK get the better hand out of it.

    Still Cruiser is purchase to protect TP. When speed matter, Cruiser are in high need.

    However, BB is slow but still 2 hits make for a good core fleet when attacking smaller fleet (3 or 4 combat units).
    I  really like all these redesign units. More balanced between themselves.
    It worth the fun to explore this 1942.2 game.
    And with  additional UK ICs make for a more historically-themed 1942.2.
    C5 A0 D0 StB are just at a right cost to not being rebuffed if an IC is only half damaged, making only 3 pts and losing any points left if roll is above 3, not a detterent.
    Also, loosing a few of them is part of the risk and not a tragic TUV swing, as it was OOB.
    A lot of Russian’s IC were bombed and is part of strategy against Russia.
    Caucasus IC was maxed out and a wasted land for 3 turns now.
    It feels like Stalingrad.
    I have no critic on M3 and C5 till now, make for a better A&A experience but I’m just wondering if it is balanced.

    After 6 rounds, IJN is massively invading Asia but Russia get relieved because of Western front opening.

    I probably played badly Germany, I will restart around G3 or G4 to see where it can go.

  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    It seems that in mid-game M3 really help USA and somehow UK.
    Once Luftwaffe is out, you can use 2 groups *three TPs from EUSA to NWE or France.
    Germany cannot hold that long.

    And early game, it allows more direct combat involvement.
    No need to foresee two turns ahead, it takes less patience to play US that way.

    South African IC at set-up was very important to block German expansion south of Sahara.
    And it preserved UK economy from falling radically. Keeping it in play against Axis.

    Of course, South Africa’s units clearly benefit from M3.
    It preserved India and Australia TPs, and it increases Inf, Art mobility in Arabic Peninsula.
    Coming faster in Egypt or Persia or Syria.

    So, it seems M3 first is better for IJN then USA and UK get the better hand out of it.

    Still Cruiser is purchase to protect TP. When speed matter, Cruiser are in high need.

    However, BB is slow but still 2 hits make for a good core fleet when attacking smaller fleet (3 or 4 combat units).
    I  really like all these redesign units. More balanced between themselves.
    It worth the fun to explore this 1942.2 game.
    And with  additional UK ICs make for a more historically-themed 1942.2.
    C5 A0 D0 StB are just at a right cost to not being rebuffed if an IC is only half damaged, making only 3 pts and losing any points left if roll is above 3, not a detterent.
    Also, loosing a few of them is part of the risk and not a tragic TUV swing, as it was OOB.
    A lot of Russian’s IC were bombed and is part of strategy against Russia.
    Caucasus IC was maxed out and a wasted land for 3 turns now.
    It feels like Stalingrad.
    I have no critic on M3 and C5 till now, make for a better A&A experience but I’m just wondering if it is balanced.

    After 6 rounds, IJN is massively invading Asia but Russia get relieved because of Western front opening.

    I probably played badly Germany, I will restart around G3 or G4 to see where it can go.

    I was rushing too fast against Russia with both Germany and Japan.
    I restarted by G3. I kept my Med Carrier and Fgs+TcBs.
    I tried to take French Equatorial Africa with 2 Infs with Cruiser and TP M3.
    USA launched 1 Cruiser and 2 Fgs to get ride of them.
    3 TPs landed in FEA and crush G Infs.
    Cruiser and TPs make a good combo, and Carrier can provide more air firepower when it is too far for the rest of the fleet.
    South African IC is still pretty useful to repel Germany. Pouring 2 units per round is a must.
    This time, IJN has sunk 2DDs+2TPs in Red Sea by Egypt. An IJN Cruiser and DDs made the kill.
    Now, UK use more Tanks to rush unit from South to North Africa.

    By round 6, there is still a fight for Australia and a cat and mouse game between US original PTO fleet and IJN 2 BBs+Carrier.
    Australia was used to reinforced USA fleet with 2 DDs.
    These 2 ICs are quite poor in production, pouring 1 unit per turn each, but it gives an idea about how Australian resources were limited.

    I used US Cruiser and 2 TPs to land into Soviet Far East, releasing a bit of pressure in Northern Crush.
    IJN has to split fleet, sending Cruiser and Fg+TcB up north to sink this US fleet.
    Next turn, I used another Cruiser and 2 TPs to reinforced Eastern Australia and US fleet.
    Japan occupying Western Australia, both ground and Naval combat will occur during this round.

    Luftwaffe is incredibly efficient on escorting or intercepting mission.
    US lose 1 StB and 1 Fg to them in russian Sky.
    Also, Japan and G bombers are quite effective, and lucky on damage at Moscow.
    But, G bomber was blown G5 over Moscow.

    They maxed out in R5, Russia only built 2 units R6.
    However, being overwhelmed from every side, Russia manage a daring strafing run against 2 Infs, 1 art and 4 Tank: only 1 Tank survived and all Russians retreated back home, with a TUV swing of 19 IPCs.

    This might relief Russia for next round, waiting Allies to knock on Western Front.
    Germany is quite overstretched again, 19 damage to repair on R6 (NWE, Berlin and Caucasus)
    With 36 IPCs left, 12 Infantry is not enough to fill all IC production capacity.
    G don’t have enough money to purchase Tank or Fighter.
    There is so many TTys to occupy around Russia, I hope any Art, Tank and planes left will be enough to crush Moscow.

    Bombers are quite a useful tool. IDK if it can be abusive actually.
    Both Russia and Germany are suffering from it.
    This bombing command may need to purchase more units to see if it is broken.
    This game, only UK and Japan purchase 1 bomber.
    In a less conventional game, it is a strategy to try next time.

    I’m still pretty amazed by the new WWII in-depth experience all SF rules provides.
    I don’t miss at all regular bombers, and with TcBs introduction it provides the A4 we want.
    And I saw a German U-boat, fleeing in SZ1 out of reach of air attack coming from UK, it was a first time.
    It feels like U-boat found the North Atlantic gap.  :-)

    I also use again DDs A1 D1 C5 blocker in PTO, once by US and another time by IJN.
    Being cheap and weak, they do something which was almost never seen in such mid-range economy game.

    It needs some experience to watch for M3 units but now, I’m getting use to it.
    Easier to prepare against surprise amphib from Japan or WUSA.


  • Baron, your play testing results are like mine were for Russia, Germany and UK. Germany and UK bombing each other seemed OK but a bit more from Germany.
    But Russia gets bombed and it may be to abusive. Granted you need to get more allies pieces to Moscow but for me thats a cop out.
    It does change some strategies. Seemed also more bombers were bought and took away some other normal buys. IMO

    Baron, side note. We went back to the pretty much normal piece values in game. Fig C9 Tac 10 Stg B 11 H. Bom 12. You seem to be getting more results now of your values and the C5 Stg. B. If we go back to other values will post results.

    Thank You for all your advice and other stuff to try.

  • '17 '16

    @SS:

    Baron, your play testing results are like mine were for Russia, Germany and UK. Germany and UK bombing each other seemed OK but a bit more from Germany.
    But Russia gets bombed and it may be to abusive. Granted you need to get more allies pieces to Moscow but for me thats a cop out.
    It does change some strategies. Seemed also more bombers were bought and took away some other normal buys. IMO
    Baron, side note. We went back to the pretty much normal piece values in game. Fig C9 Tac 10 Stg B 11 H. Bom 12. You seem to be getting more results now of your values and the C5 Stg. B. If we go back to other values will post results.

    Thank You for all your advice and other stuff to try.

    Hi SS,
    Outside note to this thread, if your friends liked air combat and TcB targeting there is a different way  to do it with regular combat values.
    D12 digits:  for Fg A6 D8, when rolling “4” or less, the hit must be apply to any enemy’s plane.
    for TcB A6-8 D6, when rolling “4” or less, you may pick any ground units of your choice, as casualty.

    All other results above “4” are treated normally, hit applied to casualty at owner’s choice, miss stay miss.

    Air retreat is possible  in any combat, not just amphibious assault, ground units still fight after attacker aircrafts retreated (same way as amphibious assault).

    That way, you keep the interactions-themed for these two planes.
    In addition, you already use a lower cost (-1 IPC) structure which help considering the higher odds of shooting down directly Fg or TcB.

    That way, you keep Fg dogfighting Fg and TcB while TcBs good rolls allow to pick Tank as casualty.

    If you want to play attacking Strategic bombers air-to-air defense, you may allows “2” or less rolls to destroy an enemy Fg in regular combat, instead of applying usual result.

    Let me know if you try it.
    Thanks for helping and play-testing.

  • '17 '16

    On C5 bombers, interactions with Fgs is good and casualty selection pretty accurate to depict WWII SBR.
    The issue remains about what to do with Russia which is pretty vulnerable if it don’t get allies planes in Moscow. In my game, I built 1 Fg on R1, and remains 2 Russian Fgs and 1 US Fg to repel bombers.
    Is bombing dmg too hard on Russia?
    Does it need a 10 IPCs Fg bid, instead of a bomber bid, as Black Elk, suggest normally to help things early game?

    Because Japan and Germany bombers make a hard time to russia if rolls stay high on damage.
    Virtually making building unit impossible with too meager resources.

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    I’d say balance is easier to fix, provided the mechanics offer more entertaining gameplay.

    For example, you could add a Red fighter as you mentioned. Or you could address the economic disparity more directly. You might give the Russians a Warbonds tech +1d6 to income each turn, and just say it represents lend lease. Might try something similar with UK if necessary.

    I think the German economy was designed in such a way that it can still function reasonably well even if sustaining heavy damage from SBR. It’s hard to push Germany below 24 ipcs, so even if they’re getting fire bombed pretty savagely, they can still be dropping 8 inf a turn.

    Russia by contrast has way fewer ipcs to start, and if Moscow is getting max damaged, they’re lucky to get just a handful of hitpoints per turn. To me this recommends some kind of income bonus for the Russians. The game doesn’t model Soviet industrial production expansion over the course of the war very well. In reality this increased by orders of magnitude, whereas in-game, after a certain point they are entirely reliant on the West to put units at the center. It’s kind of bizarre, and makes Axis strat bombing pretty overpowered. In the War Germany never rained down bombs on Moscow the way they can in game, certainly Japan never did so. But the mechanics being what they are it’s kind of hard to avoid in A&A. Given the regularity with which this kind of gameplay occurs, I think the simplest solution would be to give them a little more money to offset the fact that they are likely to be bombed from both sides.


  • I agree with both u guys concerning Russia and getting some kind of piece or money.
    Do you feel more incline to give Russia and UK a fig if need be. As far as the 1D6 roll do you think that it may be to much of a swing over turns ? What if you just gave Russia the 1D6 die roll ? 1 fig = 10  May lose in turns 2 - 4. 1D6 ave roll per turn 3.1.  T2 = 6.2  T3 = 9.3 T4 = 12.4.  but if Russia loses 2 figs it be best for the 1D6 odds to get the money back. Roll a 5 for 4 turns get your money back for the lost. 2 figs = 20 loss   4D6 rolls of 5 = 20 gain back.

    Also is this to strong for Russia once Allie troops start getting into Russia ?

    This is going to be tested even more if you go one way or the other. Is the UK and German bombing each other even ? Can Germany take Moscow with UK US bombing ? Is a Fig enough for Russia ? To me it seems like Russia needs 4 figs in game.

    I can see this 1D6 spicing up the game for Russia some what. This may also be another mod to a rule where no allies troops in Russia at any time, but thats another topic.

  • '17 '16

    @SS:

    I agree with both u guys concerning Russia and getting some kind of piece or money.
    Do you feel more incline to give Russia and UK a fig if need be. As far as the 1D6 roll do you think that it may be to much of a swing over turns ? What if you just gave Russia the 1D6 die roll ? 1 fig = 10 May lose in turns 2 - 4. 1D6 ave roll per turn 3.1.  T2 = 6.2  T3 = 9.3 T4 = 12.4.  but if Russia loses 2 figs it be best for the 1D6 odds to get the money back. Roll a 5 for 4 turns get your money back for the lost. 2 figs = 20 loss   4D6 rolls of 5 = 20 gain back.

    Also is this to strong for Russia once Allie troops start getting into Russia ?

    This is going to be tested even more if you go one way or the other. Is the UK and German bombing each other even ? Can Germany take Moscow with UK US bombing ? Is a Fig enough for Russia ? To me it seems like Russia needs 4 figs in game.

    I can see this 1D6 spicing up the game for Russia some what. This may also be another mod to a rule where no allies troops in Russia at any time, but thats another topic.

    May lose in turns 2 - 4.
    I don’t understand this sentence.
    Therefore, I’m not sure to follow numbers…

    But I get the principle gives enough money so Russia can buy a Fg.

    In my 1942.2 SFexperience, I changed 1 Fg for 1 TcB.
    I’m more inclined now, to add 1 TcB (kind of Black Elk bomber bid).
    Then Russia can buy another Fg and get 3 Fgs interceptor.

    Actually, I like the 1D6 Lend-lease. If not enough, giving +1 per round can be quite interesting.
    At the end of first round, Russia can collect 1D6+1 IPCs from Lend lease and increase Soviet industrial expansion.
    At the end of round R5, it would be 1D6+5 IPCs.
    Increasing over time.

    So, three direction: 1-Fighter bid on set-up, 2-Lend-lease, 3-Progressive Lend-lease to Russia.

    And a combination of 1 with 2 or 3, makes for 5 cases to balance the Axis StBombers Center Crush. (ABCC)

    Actually, from my little experience on balance POV, I saw no compelling reason to create an impassable Sinkiang and Szechwuan.
    But this can be our last option to delay Japan Center Crush. (JCC)


  • May lose in 2 - 4 turns

    Means Russia may lose a fig or 2 in those turns. So the 1D6 roll can make it up if they roll good dies. If you are starting to discuss the 3 bid options ( or you mean 3 options to chose from ) then I’m out of that discussion. I don’t believe in bids. Just change the setup. IMO

  • '17 '16

    @SS:

    May lose in 2 - 4 turns

    Means Russia may lose a fig or 2 in those turns. So the 1D6 roll can make it up if they roll good dies. If you are starting to discuss the 3 bid options ( or you mean 3 options to chose from ) then I’m out of that discussion. I don’t believe in bids. Just change the setup. IMO

    By bid I meant the set-up change.

  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    On C5 bombers, interactions with Fgs is good and casualty selection pretty accurate to depict WWII SBR.
    The issue remains about what to do with Russia which is pretty vulnerable if it don’t get allies planes in Moscow. In my game, I built 1 Fg on R1, and remains 2 Russian Fgs and 1 US Fg to repel bombers.
    Is bombing dmg too hard on Russia?
    Does it need a 10 IPCs Fg bid, instead of a bomber bid, as Black Elk, suggest normally to help things early game?

    Because Japan and Germany bombers make a hard time to russia if rolls stay high on damage.
    Virtually making building unit impossible with too meager resources.

    @Karl7:

    the Balanced Mod is pretty close, if not slightly pro-allied.  But big improvement over G40 OOB, where bids are now easily 20+.

    I’d say the best in terms of “balance” was the oldie: Pacific 2001. Take out the India crush, and it really was a tight, tight game.

    1942 2nd is way pro-Axis IMO.  Just start strat bombing Russia and lights out!

    It seems that Axis Bombing Center Crush is not an exclusive issue from C5 Bomber.
    Karl7 saw it in 1942.2 OOB game.
    Our play-tests may just emphasized what was already there.

    It seems to be a deeper issue, which eventually may need to be address properly.

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    Oh its definitely not exclusive to C5. In my experience it is often Japan that does the most consistent SBR damage OOB. Germany tends to preserve their combat bombers for dark skies fleet nuking and ground combats or the final battle for Moscow (rather than risking them to early AAAfire), whereas Japan will start buying StratB’s out of Tokyo pretty early on and send towards the center to raid. Once Yunnan is secure, as it almost always is on J2, Japan can raid Moscow from this territory or Kwang and land safely. They can do the same out of Karelia, once G stacks it, where Japanese bombers can also be used for Atlantic fleet coverage. Annoyingly, Japan can also use such bombers to raid London in a similar fashion once Moscow is knocked out.

    Closing Western China would probably help with this, but wouldn’t address the underlying issue, just delay it for a few rounds.

    The Russian economy is pretty weak, so it’s hard for them to stand up if they’re forced to spend half their cash each turn on repairs. This problem comes up all over the place, with the Russians too broke to do anything but turtle.

    One consequence of making China a pre-industrial nation, is that it offers no good targets for Japanese SBR. This would probably be the most appropriate use of Japanese StratB’s, but since there is no need OOB, they can just fly on to India/Moscow.

    Der Kuenstler has rules in his hybrid map that allow strat bombers to bomb any tile with an ipc value. I think the rule is pretty interesting, though probably impractical for tripleA, since it would likely require invisible factories everywhere.

    I think the C5 bombers will probably be optimal for the basic mechanics, whether the economies will scale appropriately under such conditions is another question. Seems that UK and Russia are more likely to be bombed, and both of those Nations often have a pretty low economy in the Mid-Game. Both received aid from the US though, so I think you could interpret a warbonds type income bonus for 1942.2 and interpret it as lend lease, without really needing to come up with specific lend lease rules. In G40, which has Objectives as part of the standard game, it is easier to introduce more money if needed.

  • '17 '16

    @Black_Elk:

    Oh its definitely not exclusive to C5. In my experience it is often Japan that does the most consistent SBR damage OOB. Germany tends to preserve their combat bombers for dark skies fleet nuking and ground combats or the final battle for Moscow (rather than risking them to early AAAfire), whereas Japan will start buying StratB’s out of Tokyo pretty early on and send towards the center to raid. Once Yunnan is secure, as it almost always is on J2, Japan can raid Moscow from this territory or Kwang and land safely. They can do the same out of Karelia, once G stacks it, where Japanese bombers can also be used for Atlantic fleet coverage. Annoyingly, Japan can also use such bombers to raid London in a similar fashion once Moscow is knocked out.

    Closing Western China would probably help with this, but wouldn’t address the underlying issue, just delay it for a few rounds.

    The Russian economy is pretty weak, so it’s hard for them to stand up if they’re forced to spend half their cash each turn on repairs. This problem comes up all over the place, with the Russians too broke to do anything but turtle.

    One consequence of making China a pre-industrial nation, is that it offers no good targets for Japanese SBR. This would probably be the most appropriate use of Japanese StratB’s, but since there is no need OOB, they can just fly on to India/Moscow.

    Der Kuenstler has rules in his hybrid map that allow strat bombers to bomb any tile with an ipc value. I think the rule is pretty interesting, though probably impractical for tripleA, since it would likely require invisible factories everywhere.

    I think the C5 bombers will probably be optimal for the basic mechanics, whether the economies will scale appropriately under such conditions is another question. Seems that UK and Russia are more likely to be bombed, and both of those Nations often have a pretty low economy in the Mid-Game. Both received aid from the US though, so I think you could interpret a warbonds type income bonus for 1942.2 and interpret it as lend lease, without really needing to come up with specific lend lease rules. In G40, which has Objectives as part of the standard game, it is easier to introduce more money if needed.

    Warbond is a Tech, right?
    So, it only requires to activate this Tech for Russia and UK only via Edit mode, right?

    For play-testing progressive bonus for Russia, it is also possible to throw 1 machine dice and add PUs via Edit Mode upon collecting income phase.

    So, it was the case with StBs at 12 IPCs doing D6 damage. The greater the case for C5 doing D6 damage.
    It is pretty difficult for Russia to build 10 IPCs Fg (or TcB), Infantry or Artillery are much more needed.

    For me, it seems another reason to not give A1 to StratBomber, having around 6 bombers attacking per game round (3 G + 3 J or 2G + 4 J) makes for an increase probability to shot down 1 Fg.
    At least, with A0, there is only escorting Fg (or TcB) which can shot Fg interceptor down.
    It happens during one play-test (in which there was no allies Fg in Moscow), Germany and Japan were able to provide 2 escorts each on a different SBR.

    Giving one additional Fg seems to help, but we must consider it is part of a sound allies strat to send a few Fg to Moscow.

  • '17 '16 '15

    I think you can add a progressive bid before you start the game. Pretty sure anyway

  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    You found an interesting concept.
    And it can be adjustable according to playtests.
    For example, it may remains D6 for every power.
    D6 to all four but Russia which can received:
    +1 per round cumulative figuring is increasing rate of production.

    Also, as a side note, if we find that bombing is too much damage, we can give to all, or just Russia, and/or Germany Industrial Tech. That way, it cost .5 per point of damage.

    It is another way to circumvent bomber issue.
    Russian much increase wartime production can be simulated that way.

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    CHINA RULES
    for 1942.2

    Possible bid alternative

    Western China is now closed for the purposes of movement. The border between Russian and Chinese starting territories is considered impassable. Tibetan Plateau, Taklamakan Desert etc.

    3 Soviet infantry units and 1 artillery piece are added to Sinkiang. These represent the Communist forces of the Second United Front under Mao.

    Here the CCP Reds are given a total power of 6 on attack/8 on defense 4 HP, TUV 13, to compliment and sustain the US supported Nationalist Chinese.

    The KMT under Chiang technically has a total starting power of 9 on attack/16 on defense, 7 HP, TUV 28, but because of the OOB turn order this is likely reduced to just 5 on attack/8 on defense, 3 HP, TUV 16 by the end of J1! So the added strength of the CCP is meant to prop up this beleaguered Nationalist force for a stronger united defense. The US supported KMT can eventually be reinforced via a US factory purchase, or with Western units from Burma or elsewhere. But in early rounds it is the extra force of Red units that helps maintain China as an active theater of war.

    Under the OOB turn order at least China has a way to survive the second round, and perhaps into the 3rd round or longer.

    Under American Zero turn conditions, the Chinese position would be much stronger. But reinforcements in this region would be harder to come by with Western China closed, so this may balance rather well even under A0 conditions.

    In either case the Chinese theater of War should at least remain active for longer, presenting Japan with a more realistic challenge to secure the mainland.

  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    @Baron:

    You found an interesting concept.
    And it can be adjustable according to playtests.
    For example, it may remains D6 for every power.
    D6 to all four but Russia which can received:
    +1 per round cumulative figuring is increasing rate of production.

    Also, as a side note, if we find that bombing is too much damage, we can give to all, or just Russia, and/or Germany Industrial Tech. That way, it cost .5 per point of damage.

    It is another way to circumvent bomber issue.
    Russian much increase wartime production can be simulated that way.

    Do you think this D6 bonus would be replaced by VCs collecting phase end of round of play?

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 1
  • 9
  • 4
  • 1
  • 48
  • 2
  • 4
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

35

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts