@The-Captain said in G40 Waffen-SS Panzer Army:
is best suited when used in a defensive role.
that was my initial thought as well
G40 Strategic Advantages - Delta
-
@Young:
No problem YG. I tried doing some titles in Russian but the words in Russian through the eyes of someone who speaks English they didn’t seem very romantic LOL. Kraznyy Bronya is Red Armor if you want to give that a try.
Red Armor is as romantic as you can get, but it’s not the tanks themselves that deserve the spotlight, but rather the numbers that were produced.
I’ve been doing a little research on the 50 thousand + tanks that Russia produced between 1941-45, in particular factory N:185 which made around 30,000 of them… and one term keeps coming up for the city of Chelyabinsk, where Factory N:185 was relocated “Tankograd”, and I also realized that the advantage is all wrong to represent this, so I’ve modified the “Tank Production” SA.
That’s pretty good. I might make one suggestion for “Mobile Factories” as “Great Patriotic War”
-
@Young:
No problem YG. I tried doing some titles in Russian but the words in Russian through the eyes of someone who speaks English they didn’t seem very romantic LOL. Kraznyy Bronya is Red Armor if you want to give that a try.
Red Armor is as romantic as you can get, but it’s not the tanks themselves that deserve the spotlight, but rather the numbers that were produced.
I’ve been doing a little research on the 50 thousand + tanks that Russia produced between 1941-45, in particular factory N:185 which made around 30,000 of them… and one term keeps coming up for the city of Chelyabinsk, where Factory N:185 was relocated “Tankograd”, and I also realized that the advantage is all wrong to represent this, so I’ve modified the “Tank Production” SA.
That’s pretty good. I might make one suggestion for “Mobile Factories” as “Great Patriotic War”
Actually, the same factory that produced so many tanks is also one of the few factories that took on the massive task to mobilize and relocate to the east. It seems to me that “Tankograd” encompasses both advantages historically, so I’ve replaced “mobile industry” for another original revised national advantage called “Trans-Siberian Railway”. Checkout post #1 for the edit.
-
Well this is a cool project YG. I think it really appeals to a broad spectrum of A&A players. It’s HRs but it doesn’t get too crazy (like me) and has direct relations or relates in provenance to things we’ve seen within the series. These are complex enough to woo veterans but are simple enough that newer players can easily apply them. Good work +1.
-
Well this is a cool project YG. I think it really appeals to a broad spectrum of A&A players. It’s HRs but it doesn’t get too crazy (like me) and has direct relations or relates in provenance to things we’ve seen within the series. These are complex enough to woo veterans but are simple enough that newer players can easily apply them. Good work +1.
That +1 means a lot to me Toblerone… thank you.
-
This is looking better and better YG. I like that the small countries can get in on the action.
The Trans-Siberian railway advantage will be really good for Russia to stop a Japanese advance. One problem I have always found with Russia is that once the 18 troops out east are destroyed by Japan or withdrawn by Russia, especially once Germany starts it’s attack on Russia, there is nothing to stop Japan from gobbling up all those eastern territories. Sure they are only 1 IPC each, but that lost income can really count when Germany is knocking at Moscow’s door. And it’s really infuriating when Japan does this with a single tank.
-
@Young:
I prefer them a tad shorter and more related to the Advantage… like “Stalin’s Steel”, but even that doesn’t encompass the 10s of thousands of tanks forged by women and children who died working merciless double shifts in the Urals tank factories!!!
Here are a few suggestions. One approach would be to allude to the appeal that was made to the patriotism of the Russian people (through such means as propaganda) to induce them to work harder. Possible phrases to express this would include “Propaganda Campaign”, “Patriotism Campaign”, “For the Motherland”, “All for Russia” and “All for the Front” (the latter being an actual Soviet slogan). Another approach would be use the phrases “Command Economy” or “Five-Year Plan” to evoke the peculiatities of the Soviet economic system.
-
@CWO:
@Young:
I prefer them a tad shorter and more related to the Advantage… like “Stalin’s Steel”, but even that doesn’t encompass the 10s of thousands of tanks forged by women and children who died working merciless double shifts in the Urals tank factories!!!
Here are a few suggestions. One approach would be to allude to the appeal that was made to the patriotism of the Russian people (through such means as propaganda) to induce them to work harder. Possible phrases to express this would include “Propaganda Campaign”, “Patriotism Campaign”, “For the Motherland”, “All for Russia” and “All for the Front” (the latter being an actual Soviet slogan). Another approach would be use the phrases “Command Economy” or “Five-Year Plan” to evoke the peculiatities of the Soviet economic system.
Thanks for that CWO Marc, I like your ideas and the way I see it, the democrat Roosevelt motivated his war time population with a little more pride than fear, and the communist Stalin motivated his his population with a little more fear than pride. Regardless, I did a little research and I am completely sold on “Tankograd” as a title that encompasses the relocated factory and the massive tank production from Russia, and “Trans-Siberian Railway” speaks for itself. please review all the titles and let me know if any don’t make sense, I hated Dug-in Defenders and Tob suggested “Code of Bushido” which I think is better. At this point I think everything is solid as far as titles, but you never know.
-
This is looking better and better YG. I like that the small countries can get in on the action.
The Trans-Siberian railway advantage will be really good for Russia to stop a Japanese advance. One problem I have always found with Russia is that once the 18 troops out east are destroyed by Japan or withdrawn by Russia, especially once Germany starts it’s attack on Russia, there is nothing to stop Japan from gobbling up all those eastern territories. Sure they are only 1 IPC each, but that lost income can really count when Germany is knocking at Moscow’s door. And it’s really infuriating when Japan does this with a single tank.
Thanks KNP,
I’m pretty sure I’m finished, other than adding minor clarifications from “what if” questions, or minor modifications due to problems found during a play test. With that said, I think at this point you’re safe to print them as is and please, be sure to report back with any play test findings of your own.
-
@Young:
Thanks for that CWO Marc, I like your ideas and the way I see it, the democrat Roosevelt motivated his war time population with a little more pride than fear, and the communist Stalin motivated his his population with a little more fear than pride. Regardless, I did a little research and I am completely sold on “Tankograd” as a title that encompasses the relocated factory and the massive tank production from Russia, and “Trans-Siberian Railway” speaks for itself. please review all the titles and let me know if any don’t make sense, I hated Dug-in Defenders and Tob suggested “Code of Bushido” which I think is better. At this point I think everything is solid as far as titles, but you never know.
Richard Overy has the interesting theory that the USA did well in war production because its industry operated entirely on the principles of free-market economics and that the URRS did well in war production because its industry operated entirely on the principles of a state-commanded economy, whereas Nazi Germany’s industry was based on a clumsy mixture of both systems that ended up falling between two barstools.
I’ll have a look at the current SA titles later today (which is shaping up as a busy day at the office) and I’ll post any feedback I might have.
-
@CWO:
@Young:
Thanks for that CWO Marc, I like your ideas and the way I see it, the democrat Roosevelt motivated his war time population with a little more pride than fear, and the communist Stalin motivated his his population with a little more fear than pride. Regardless, I did a little research and I am completely sold on “Tankograd” as a title that encompasses the relocated factory and the massive tank production from Russia, and “Trans-Siberian Railway” speaks for itself. please review all the titles and let me know if any don’t make sense, I hated Dug-in Defenders and Tob suggested “Code of Bushido” which I think is better. At this point I think everything is solid as far as titles, but you never know.
Richard Overy has the interesting theory that the USA did well in war production because its industry operated entirely on the principles of free-market economics and that the URRS did well in war production because its industry operated entirely on the principles of a state-commanded economy, whereas Nazi Germany’s industry was based on a clumsy mixture of both systems that ended up falling between two barstools.
I’ll have a look at the current SA titles later today (which is shaping up as a busy day at the office) and I’ll post any feedback I might have.
That’s a great analogy CWO Marc… (or Richard Overy).
-
I’ve looked at the latest version of the list, and most of the titles and concepts look fine. The new “Code of Bushido” title for enhanced island defense is a good choice because it’s distinctly Japanese and because it highlights the overall death-before-surrender philosophy that powered Japanese resistance rather than just the narrower concept of “Dug-In Defenders” (which is potentially applicable to most armies, since a soldier’s best friend on the battlefield is often his shovel rather than his rifle). I also like “Tankograd”, which nicely exemplifies the Soviet war industry, focuses on the all-important element of tank production, and is better known than Magnitogorsk.
“Civilian Labour” is a tricky one, in the sense that it’s an imperfect term for which the alternatives are even more problematic. Every country had civilian labour, in both peacetime and wartime; what changed in WWII is that many countries mobilized labour on a vast scale (including the recruitment of great numbers of women) and converted much of their industrial capacity from the production of consumer goods to the production of war materials. Expressing this in just a couple words applicable to all countries, however, isn’t easy. “Rosie the Riveter” was a tempting choice, but it’s too American and too focused on the specific element of female industrial employment. (And as the aforementioned Richard Overy pointed out, “Wanda the Welder” would have been a more accurate phrase in view of changing production methods.) So I don’t know what might work better. “Civilian Mobilization” would be one possibility, and “Home Front” is another, but neither term sounds precisely right.
I have two comments about this one: “Boeing Fortresses: When American strategic bombers attack weather in a battle or SBR, they now receive 2 dice each and the player may select the best result. Also, American strategic bombers now hit at 2 or less when defending against interceptors, and are now immune to built in AA fire around facilities during SBRs.” First, it sounds like four added advantages rather than one, which seems a bit generous. Second, I get the impression that the term “Boeing Fortresses” tries to reconcile the Round-the-clock-bombing concept (centered on the B-17) with the Super-bombers concept (which is understood to mean the advanced, pressurized, high-altitude, large-capacity, long-range, remotely-operated-gun-turret B-29, since the B-17 was quite conventional by comparison). I don’t know what to recommend for this one, since the optimal title will depend on what capabilities the title is meant to represent.
“Kaiten Torpedos” is problematic because the bonus described applies to all Japanese subs in all Japanese-controlled territories, whereas the Kaiten was in fact a suicide torpedo/mini-sub that was used when Japan was on its last legs. A better (but not optimal) title would be “Long Lance” (or “Long Lance Torpedo”), since this oxygen-fuelled weapon – its Japanese designation was the Type 93 – was the best heavyweight torpedo in the world and thus a genuine Japanese advantage. The two problems, however, are that it was already in service when WWII started, and that it wasn’t limited to subs: it was also carried by destroyers and cruisers, as I recall. So here too, I don’t have a clear-cut solution to propose.
I’d propose changing “Shipyard Engineers” to “Shipyard Improvements”. All shipyards have engineers, so “Shipyard Engineers” would be vague in terms of what it conveys. “Shipyard Improvements” implies enhancement, and is also sufficiently general that it would be applicable to most countries. The US, for example, adopted ship prefabrication techniques on a scale that nobody else matched, but several countries (including Japan) eventually made the sensible decision to build simplified ship designs in some cases (notably transport ships and escort vessels), and also switched from riveting to welding (which had the added advantage of saving weight in the finished product).
-
CWO Marc,
Thank you for that analysis of the SA titles, first off… the “Kaiten Torpedos” SA came from the A&A Revised national objectives, so I never questioned it, but after reading your post and looking into it further, it seems that the advantage was misrepresented (like a few that Larry gave us). Therefore, I have used your suggestion of “Long Lance Torpedos” and have also changed the whole Advantage to better suit the historical influence. That one always confused me, but I never considered myself an expert of the war all though I know quite a bit… hopefully this Japanese torpedo is now “in the water” correctly.
The “Boeing Fortresses” title is one of my favorites, and came from Toblerone77 pointing out that the European theater had the “Flying Fortresses” and the Pacific theater had the “Super Fortresses” and I wanted to encompass the whole package. KNP helped me flesh out the advantage itself which is up against “Essex Class Carriers” and I would like to see some choice stats on that pairing before I change anything.
Instead of “Civilian Labour”, how about “Patriotic Work Force”? I like that, and I understand what you’re saying about “Shipyard Engineers”, so after reading your post describing the switch from riveting to welding, I immediately thought of “Modernized Shipyards”. I also have a question about “Paratroopers”, is this an ango-American military term or universal? my instincts are telling me to use “Airborne Assault Troops” instead, but I’m not sure if I have the same problem with the word “Airborne” as well.
-
Wasn’t “Arsenal of Democracy” used in A50? Could be applicable for increased wartime production.
-
Wasn’t “Arsenal of Democracy” used in A50? Could be applicable for increased wartime production.
Looking for a universal term to encompass all nations, so far we are on “Patriotic Work Force”… what do you think?
-
Oh I see. I think CWO Marc’s suggestion of Home Front is the most appropriate then, even it isn’t a perfect match.
-
Oh I see. I think CWO Marc’s suggestion of Home Front is the most appropriate then, even it isn’t a perfect match.
I think I’m gonna settle for “Mass Production”
-
Made changes to Japan’s Strategic Advantages today:
1. Replaced “Kaiten Torpedos” with “Long Lance Torpedos”.
2. Increased the “Tokyo Express” cargo limit to 2 infantry.
3. Shuffled the availability rounds putting “Code of Bushido” with “Banzai Attack”, and “Long Lance Torpedos” with “Tokyo Express”.
Plus a few strategic advantage title changes…
“Civilian Labour” is now “Mass Production”
“Paratroopers” might change to “Airborne Assault Troops” (not sure yet).
and “Shipyard Engineers” is now " Modernized Shipyards"
-
“Modernized Shipyards” is fine: general in concept and applicable anywhere, so it works. The package-encompassing argument for “Boeing Fortresses” sounds all right too. I like “Airborne Assault Troops” too.
I have reservations about “Patriotic Work Force”, which seems to imply that without this upgrade a country would have an unpatriotic workforce. “Mass Production”, to me, simply differentiates between making things on an assembly line rather than hand-crafting them one by one, and doesn’t inherently refer to a wartime situation. (Detroit was producing cars on assembly lines long before WWII.) How about “Economic Mobilization” or “Total War Economy?”
Just before I posted this, I saw your post saying "3. Shuffled the availability rounds putting “Code of Bushido” with “Banzai Attack”, and “Long Lance Torpedos” with “Tokyo Express” – which you’ll be amused to see was going to be one of my suggestions. The paragraph I’d written on this was: “Regarding “Code of Bushido” (currently R5) and “Long Lance Torpedos” (currently R8), how about switching their round numbers? Japan had the Long Lance from the beginning of the war, so it would make sense for this advantage to be earlier in the game, while Japan’s fight-to-the-death defense of the islands it controlled was characteristic of middle and late phases of the war (when it was on the defensive rather than on the offensive), so it would make sense for this advantage to be later in the game.” :-D
-
@Young:
“Paratroopers” might change to “Airborne Assault Troops” (not sure yet).
On this point, by the way, I think Airborne encompasses both paratroops and glider troops. Which is fine, unless you want to refer specifically to paras – in which case “Parachute Troops” would be a good generic term.
-
@CWO:
@Young:
“Paratroopers” might change to “Airborne Assault Troops” (not sure yet).
On this point, by the way, I think Airborne encompasses both paratroops and glider troops. Which is fine, unless you want to refer specifically to paras – in which case “Parachute Troops” would be a good generic term.
I agree, “Airborne Assault Troops” it shall be.
@CWO:
I have reservations about “Patriotic Work Force”, which seems to imply that without this upgrade a country would have an unpatriotic workforce. “Mass Production”, to me, simply differentiates between making things on an assembly line rather than hand-crafting them one by one, and doesn’t inherently refer to a wartime situation. (Detroit was producing cars on assembly lines long before WWII.) How about “Economic Mobilization” or “Total War Economy?”
I’ll keep those in mind, I may have to work on this one a little bit, but I’m gonna feel out “War Time Production” for a while.
@CWO:
Just before I posted this, I saw your post saying "3. Shuffled the availability rounds putting “Code of Bushido” with “Banzai Attack”, and “Long Lance Torpedos” with “Tokyo Express” – which you’ll be amused to see was going to be one of my suggestions. The paragraph I’d written on this was: “Regarding “Code of Bushido” (currently R5) and “Long Lance Torpedos” (currently R8), how about switching their round numbers? Japan had the Long Lance from the beginning of the war, so it would make sense for this advantage to be earlier in the game, while Japan’s fight-to-the-death defense of the islands it controlled was characteristic of middle and late phases of the war (when it was on the defensive rather than on the offensive), so it would make sense for this advantage to be later in the game.” :-D
All that was exactly my train of thought, that and forcing players to choose between two destroyer specific SAs, and two infantry specific SAs… without either of them piggy backing each other latter in the game.
Thanks a lot for the historical references, it really helped make these advantages more accurate.
Suggested Topics
