G40 Enhanced begins. All are welcome.

[Derek]

Trying to get peoples thoughts on this…

Leave battleships at 20 IPCs, along with the other cost changes.
TRN-6, SS-7, DD-8, CA-10, CV-15, BB-20

Make battleships overpriced, inefficient, ‘terror weapons’ as they were in the real war.
-Roll 2 dice for battleships during conduct convoy disruption. (Same as planes and subs)
-In addition; UK and USA will roll a single dice during convoy disruption for each enemy battleship that is not in a convoy zone, and is on their respective side of the map board.
(Similar to ‘unrestricted sub warfare’ in 1914)
-UK Europe will roll for axis BBs on the europe side of the map board.
-UK Pacific will for axis BBs on the pacific side of the map board.
-USA will roll for all axis BBs.

This will create a more historical simulation of battleships. They were built primarily to raid enemy shipping from out of range of escorts, and to generally strike fear into the enemy. The allies went to exceeding lengths to sink these behemoths (see: Bismarck and Yamato)

This also creates a more diverse roll for each the cruiser and the battleship in game.
The cruiser being the superior combat unit. (as it should be)
The battleship being the overrated but sometimes effective, economic/propaganda threat.

[Jennifer]

Sounds okay.  Not sure really….so you are basically saying if a battleship is adjacent to enemy territories, even if it is not a convoy zone, it can do convoy damage?

Might be better to just let them shell naval bases, air bases and minor complexes if in an adjacent sea zone - but it counts as a combat action (start in said sea zone, elect to conduct shelling INSTEAD of moving or engaging enemies and of course, there could be no enemies in said sea zone.)  Little simpler, lets them both do CRD and Shell.

[Derek]

@Cmdr:

Sounds okay.  Not sure really….so you are basically saying if a battleship is adjacent to enemy territories, even if it is not a convoy zone, it can do convoy damage?

Might be better to just let them shell naval bases, air bases and minor complexes if in an adjacent sea zone - but it counts as a combat action (start in said sea zone, elect to conduct shelling INSTEAD of moving or engaging enemies and of course, there could be no enemies in said sea zone.)  Little simpler, lets them both do CRD and Shell.

Your idea would work too, however not very often you let a BB park outside your ICs, bases.

Mine was for USA and UK to roll for Axis battleships that are not in convoy zones. Those axis BBs do not need to be any specific place (shore or open ocean) other than not in a convoy zone.
So basically USA will roll atleast 1 dice for every axis battleship on the map, except for the ones in convoy zones.
The dice are the same as any convoy dice, except no damage limit. (roll 1 dice, 1-3 is that damage, 4-6 is no damage)
BBs in convoy zones are simply treated like subs and planes are now (2 dice)

Leaving cost at 20 IPCs, or even higher

This creates a inefficient unit with regards to combat, very overpriced. (as they were in the real war)
But they can be potentially dangerous out raiding convoys and for negative propaganda reasons.
Allies would likely not purchase too many battleships, where the axis may
Allies may ‘hunt down’ axis BBs

creates some historical realism, while also making the cruiser the clear victor in combat (as it should be)
cruiser and BB would have 2 distinct roles

[baron Münchhausen]

I wonder if this could be a workable incentive to buy Battleship.
When you can buy 2 cruisers for the same price, with much more combat capacity than 1 single BB.

A6D6C20 2 bombard @3 vs 1A4D4C20, 2 hits, bombard 1@4.

Then it needs more than the promises that you can hurt the enemy’s economy, as Bomber or Subs can do but at a far lesser cost: 3 subs (21 IPCs) in convoy zones = 6 dice 1-3.

[Derek]

but a submarine must be in a convoy zone
bombers can die to AA

a single axis battleship on either side of the board, that is not in a convoy zone, can potentially cost the allies 6 IPCs (3UK 3 USA) per turn, with no risk to the battleship

could make it simpler, and strengthen it a tad. USA, UKpac, UK euro roll 1 dice for axis battleship no matter where they are at
roll 2 dice for BBs in convoy zones like submarines and planes do now

so a battleship in a convoy zone could potentially cost up to 6 (loss for axis) or 9 (loss for allies)

have to be careful making to too powerful though

In summation:
USA rolls 1 convoy dice for each axis battleship on the board. No damage limit.
UK pac would roll for each axis battleship on the pacific board
UK euro would roll for each axis battleship on the europe board
in addition, during the conduct convoy phase roll 2 dice for battleships in convoy zones (same as planes and subs)

Again BB would become an inefficient combat unit, but a ‘terror weapon’ so to speak. ‘Rampaging around the board’.
Could even add a NO for USA and UK if there are no Axis battleships. (Would make historical sense)
Cruisers would now be the best all around combat naval unit (when factoring in bombard). As they rightfully should be.

Obviously you wouldnt see a battleship spam, but Axis would purchase 1 every now and again (more often than cruisers are purchased now imo)
And cruisers would really go from afterthought, to the workhorse of your fleet.

[Jennifer]

Oh!  I thought it was American and British battleships doing the damage!  Okay, then I would make it any Axis battleship in the Med, S. Atlantic, N. Atlantic or Adriatic because Japanese battleships, I don’t think, were raiding American shipping all that much in the Pacific…could be wrong.

I still kinda like BBs being able to shell enemy bases (and minor complexes) if parked along side the adjacent sea zone.  It’s not something you would do often and it would not be your whole strategy for building BBs, but it would be nice for both sides in those cases when the BBs are there and for whatever reason, you do not want to do anything else.

[baron Münchhausen]

@Cmdr:

Oh!  I thought it was American and British battleships doing the damage!  Okay, then I would make it any Axis battleship in the Med, S. Atlantic, N. Atlantic or Adriatic because Japanese battleships, I don’t think, were raiding American shipping all that much in the Pacific…could be wrong.

**I still kinda like BBs being able to shell enemy bases (and minor complexes) if parked along side the adjacent sea zone. ** It’s not something you would do often and it would not be your whole strategy for building BBs, but it would be nice for both sides in those cases when the BBs are there and for whatever reason, you do not want to do anything else.Â

Me too.

[Derek]

The convoy dice outside of convoy zones would represent more than just raiding convoys.
And would be stronger than bombing ICs
Which for starters would make little realistic sense seeing the range needed for such a task
And would probably not even be used all that often

[Derek]

For my thanksgiving game here is what we will be playing:

Cost changes:
Air/Naval bases     12 IPCs
Tactical bombers   10 IPCs
Cruisers               10 IPCs
-Evasive maneuvers, each transport caught undefended by an attacking warship or plane may roll 1 dice. A roll of a 1 is a successful evasive maneuver and that transport is removed from battle and placed back on the game board, a transport that evaded an enemy attack while undefended may not unload units until its next turn.
-Roll 2 dice for battleships during conduct convoy disruption. (Same as planes and subs)
-In addition, UK and USA will roll a single dice during convoy disruption for each Axis battleship. (Excluding the Baltic and Black Seas. SZs 113, 114, 115 and 100)
–UK Pacific will roll for Axis battleships on the Pacific side.
–UK Europe will roll for Axis battleships on the Europe side.
–USA will roll for all Axis battleships.

Neutral blocks. If a strict neutral territory is attacked by one side, all the strict neutrals in that block immediately are mobilized for the other side. If the other side cannot decide which neutrals will join which nation, the attacker of the first neutral will decide.
Mongolian block: (all Mongolian territories) Rules remain OOB.
South American block:  Venezuela, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, Rio de oro, Portuguese guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Angola, Mozambique
European block:  Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, Sweden.
African block: Rio de oro, Portuguese guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Angola, Mozambique.
Middle-eastern block: Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan
Neutral militia setup changes:
Sweden: 4 INF, 1 ART, 1 AAA
Yugoslavia: 4 INF, 1 ART
Spain: 4 INF, 1 ART, 1 AAA
Turkey: 5 INF, 1 ART, 1 ARM, 1 AAA

Strategic Rail Movement.
During the noncombat move phase, all friendly home territory VCs give +1 movement to all land units who began their turn in that territory.

Technology Rules:
Each power will receive tech tokens, based on their current production value at the beginning of their respective turns.
Additional tokens may not be purchased.
Only nations at war participate. China will never participate.
National Objective income does not count towards tech rolls, neither does IPCs saved.
A roll of 6 is a breakthrough, roll to see what tech you get in the category you chose.
A roll of 1 is a token lost.
0-24IPCs = 1 token
25-49IPCs = 2 tokens
50-99IPCs = 3 tokens
100+IPCs = 4 tokens
Unsuccessful tokens not lost, remain until that powers next turn.
Additional tokens may not be purchased.

Tech Categories: (All technologies as OOB)
Army Doctrine
(1-2)Paratroopers
(3-4)Adv Artillery
(5-6)Improved Mech

Naval & Aviation Technology
(1-2)Super Submarines
(3-4)Rockets
(5-6)Radar

Infrastructure
(1-2)Increased Factory Production
(3-4)Improved Shipyards
(5-6)War Bonds

Combat Aviation
(1-2)Jet Fighters
(3-4)Long Range Aircraft
(5-6)Heavy Bombers

[baron Münchhausen]

Have fun, hope you can try everything to your satisfaction.
Let us know your debriefing thoughts.
I bolded above the points which have my highest interest.

[baron Münchhausen]

How was your game of G40e?
Funny or not?
Able to try something new or not?

---

I was thinking about cost of cruiser and battleship… again.

I have a totally different way to achieve some kind of fair battle to improve the worthiness of both, probably too unbalancing but I throw it anyway:

Treat cruiser as an Heavy Cruiser for real:
CA A3D3C12 bombard @3, 2 hits

CV stay the same as OOB: A0D2C16, 2 hits, after 1 hit loose all landing capacity.

BB A4D4C20, bombard @4, 3 hits.

If it is too much,
we can consider that, almost the same as the carrier, when cruiser and BB are at their last hit (cruiser hit once, BB hit twice),
they can no more bombard, nor attack or defend, but still surviving and be able to repair at a Naval Base.

They are costly units, so any player will think twice before loosing them once and for all. It can open somekind of tactical decision on the spot, during the battle.

They can be like floating defenseless and cripple wreck while other units (mostly planes and carrier taking a hit) still taken as casualties until the player see no other issue than sinking them.

Or, while taking hits, decides to sink a carrier instead of loosing the defensive capacity of the battleship by taking an additional hit… Just to realize after a few lucky dices, it would have been better to cripple the BB, to save both: the carrier and the BB (just an example).

[Derek]

Game went well, one battleship purchased by japan.
Several cruisers by USA, 1 by Italy

Played LHs 42 however to save on time.
Neutral blocks were very fun.
2 transports evaded during the game. Including a German one in the med, which died the next round after chucking 2 more infantry to Tobruk

The tech rules were especially fun.
Everyone got to roll them, and splitting them up into 4 categories is so much better.
UK rolled 1s on its first 3 tech rolls, losing them.

Overall nothing was too game altering, or too complicated.
And all added some fun factor.

Italy being able to afford a cruiser is a big positive. Little nations need some help to make them more fun

I would never be in favor of 3 hit units as there really isn’t a good way to keep track of it F2F

[baron Münchhausen]

@Uncrustable:

Game went well, one battleship purchased by japan.
Several cruisers by USA, 1 by Italy

Played LHs 42 however to save on time.
Neutral blocks were very fun.
2 transports evaded during the game. Including a German one in the med, which died the next round after chucking 2 more infantry to Tobruk

The tech rules were especially fun.
Everyone got to roll them, and splitting them up into 4 categories is so much better.
UK rolled 1s on its first 3 tech rolls, losing them.

Overall nothing was too game altering, or too complicated.
And all added some fun factor.

Italy being able to afford a cruiser is a big positive. Little nations need some help to make them more fun

I would never be in favor of 3 hit units as there really isn’t a good way to keep track of it F2F

Glad to see it.
The opportunity to roll for tech without paying extra IPCs seems cool.
Lucky transports… They rolled “1” just before being all wiped out, isn’t it?
Did you used battleship at 18 IPCs or OOB cost?

[Derek]

Updated OP

Improved Shipyards: TRN 5, SS 6, DD 7, CA 9, CV 14, BB 16

[baron Münchhausen]

So?
You deleted all the thread and serious post on cost structure and cruiser at 10 and everything else?

[Derek]

It had been discussed and agreed upon.
Then was hijacked, and taken for a ride far off course.

[baron Münchhausen]

@Uncrustable:

It had been discussed and agreed upon.
Then was hijacked, and taken for a ride far off course.

Agreed upon by whom? How many players?

Agreed on what?
Even you was balancing between a 18 or 20 IPCs battleship?

And for those who would ask the same question about 11 IPCs Cruiser, advocating for it in G40e, what will you do?
They won’t be convince on a simple: “10 is better, believe me.”

And even if that’s true that it was “hijacked”, why was it necessary to delete the thread?
What do you loose by letting the thread lives by itself?

This Red…something was probably arguing a POV of many “historical accuracy” fans.
He was advocating the 20 IPCs BBs/ 11 IPCs CA

From my POV, it was very extrinsic reason (and clearly not a decisive one) but many players have this same opinion based on very different perspective.

My last post was trying to show that the cost structure can also satisfy someone which like historical accuracy (as far as A&A can go). That this cost structure can be “Master of both world” and by this way putting an end to this line of objection.

You didn’t even, let a chance to start another thread to discuss this specific point.
(Exchanges on forum are not a matter of minutes but often of 24H period to answer.)

And I wasn’t stuck on this historical aspect:
my post before the last was about the 7 IPCs Subs,
hoping that someone can add his part on this.

And how can you replace all the math stuff of KionAAA and his unique way of comparing unit?
Trying to balance BB/CA/DD/CV.

[Derek]

Was 2 pages of history discussion. Which country made how many of which ship type…
I also mentioned several times, to no avail, that it was not the thread for that particular discussion. Also suggested a new one be created.

But I’d like to move on.

You asked about SS @7 IPCs.
I wonder if we can add some sense to them with these prices…
That is: When a submarine is not submerged, there are no special rules regarding aircraft vs subs. When a submarine is or is not submerged does not change from OOB. However a sub still can never act as a blocker.
While not submerged, or at the surface, a sub does not have a first strike ‘sneak attack’
While at the surface it can hit enemy air units, and enemy air units do not need a destroyer to hit the sub.
Once a sub submerges it can no longer hit aircraft, aircraft then need a destroyer to hit the sub.
A submerged sub retains it’s first strike ‘sneak attack’ as long as there are no enemy destroyers present.
Also a submarine may submerge and retreat the battle, without leaving the SZ. So long as there are no enemy destroyers in the battle.

According to the rules (if I’m not mistaken) a submarine is considered ‘at the surface’ or ‘not submerged’ until it’s owner decides whether or not to submerge it. Once submerged it remains that way until the end of the battle, where it then resurfaces.

Basically a sub has 3 options:
Stay at the surface (acting as a normal A2D1 unit)
Submerge (use current OOB rules)
Submerge and retreat from the battle (remaining in the SZ)

In OOB rules a destroyer effectively blocks enemy submarines from submerging.
With these rules a submarine could still submerge, but an enemy destroyer blocks both the sneak attack and submerge and retreat while allowing friendly aircraft to target enemy subs.

This would give subs a little more power.
However considering there is only 1 IPC difference in cost from a destroyer, and submarines cannot block, I think there will be good reason to have some of both.

Is this too powerful for subs?
With this they can now act as proper escorts for transports. Albeit at a very low defensive roll (1)
This would certainly change some of the core dynamics of the game.

What do you think ?

[Jennifer]

I’d rather see submarines @8 and if they are alone in a sea zone, then destroyers need to roll a hit to “find” the submarines first, then roll to kill them.  That way you don’t automatically just “block” them from running away.

Considering you added evasion to transports, I don’t think this is overly complicated or difficult to implement.

[Derek]

@Cmdr:

I’d rather see submarines @8 and if they are alone in a sea zone, then destroyers need to roll a hit to “find” the submarines first, then roll to kill them.  That way you don’t automatically just “block” them from running away.

Considering you added evasion to transports, I don’t think this is overly complicated or difficult to implement.

You want to increase cost of every ship?
Or just sub to 8? With increased dice values im assuming?

leaving stats other than cost OOB, here are a couple sets that are pretty balanced:
SS 7, DD 8, CA 10, CV 16, BB 18
SS 8, DD 9, CA 11, CV 17, BB 19
SS 9, DD 10, CA 12, CV 18, BB 20

But the first one is both more balanced and closer to OOB, less game changing. And i think most would prefer lower costs over higher costs for naval units.

destroyers countering subs on a 1:1 bases i think would create either a sub/destroyer spam or OP subs, neither of which is good for the game.
rolling dice to detect subs is also a little more of a ‘tactical component’, i have played with it before back when i played revised alot, and it just felt out of whack for a grand strategic game, and again it gives more power to submarines, which at 7 IPCs are still the best offensive naval unit in the game.