Chicago Rules for AA50 (1941 version)

@chrisbump86

Let me know how it goes (I never tried this before, I’ve been a bit busy)!

OK. Comment noted.
Don’t be afraid about numbers, they will be much less present since they found a way to be applied in a Triple A Redesign game.

I will try to refrained myself to not overflow too much threads.

For language difference, maybe someday it will improve…

Here is an interesting bit of historical trivia. The US 8th Air Force actually had bases in the Ukraine for a short time. From June to September 1944, the 8th Air Force started a shuttle run of bombers that would take off from England and Italy, bomb targets in Germany then fly on to 3 bases in the Ukraine, Piryatin, Mirgorod and Poltava. The reasoning was mainly to show solidarity with the Russians and to hit Germany from an unexpected quarter.
The mission was called “Operation Frantic”. I don’t think it was much of a success. One reason is that the Luftwaffe bomber arm was still fairly strong in the East. Some Luftwaffe planes saw the American bombers heading into Russia. Then when a shot up P-51 crashed in Poland, it had documents on the Russian bases. Luftwaffe command was notified and they send Fliegerkorps IV, nearly 350 He 111s, to pound those bases while the B-17s were lined up in neat rows due to lack of space. It was the 8th Air Force’s costliest single operation of the war.
I didn’t even know about this until I read it in World War II magazine.

@Hobbes:

Based on AA50’s 1941 scenario.

I apologize, I just realized this must be on the Revised map.
I saw AA50 1941 and just assumed it was on that board.

the turn order grabbed my attention because I think that the AA50 turn order where UK always follows Japan makes a Pacfic campaign very difficult to achieve for the allies.

Interesting addition of Communist Chinese forces.

Cmdr,

TG:

In anniversary, the only way to have a submarine threat is to have your submarines scattered about.  So far it has been my experience that usually you are attacking from at least two different sea zones, this would encourage you to attack from three or more to get the wolfpack bonus.

I disagree.  One of the best reasons to buy subs is that they’re cheap and can take hits during a naval battle.  If you’re subs are scattered in different sea zones, you negate this fodder ability in a defensive battle.

Secondly, I’m all about simplicity.  Forcing the player to attack from 3 Different Sea Zones adds an unnecessary complexity to the game.

Weren’t we trying to make subs A LOT better, as you claim they are “Bogus?”

3)  Submarine captains spent long times lining up shots in the security of knowing they were not seen and had plenty of time.  They could be choosier.

Okay, you clarified it for me.

tekkyy,

well both principles (1. a ratio whatever it is 2. each destroyer roll one die) encourages players to build more destroyers
the actual numbers can be tuned

I like ratio better because it doesn’t add to the combat sequence
its also something players are used to (from placing infantry on 1 or 2 on the battle board)

Agreed.

Joe,

I would think if you’d want to fix the role of submarines, then fixes should be directed to possibly to biggest impact subs had on the war - attacking shipping and supply lines.

How about a “SBR-type” rule for subs in key sea zones?  Maybe against shipments to UK and Japan only since they were most dependent on outside resources?  Destroyers protecting these sea zones get a “AA” type role to defend so that subs have a chance to live and there is incentive to build subs?  I would think that this could open up the Atlantic and Pacific a little more for something more than just sea unit stacking.

Seconded.  +1 for an inventive idea.

Yes, well at least its not as bad as 1 out of 6 … ouch. The worst is when a tranny kills the bomber, which means every bomber Germany had during the war was shot down by a liberty ship carrying tea bags to england.I just want to throw the board out of my window after that.

Hey, I have been playing this game since it was invented. I have seen tons of different strategies, and tried lots of different things. My friends are also very experienced players. I never said building an IC early with japan wasn’t risky, but for me the rewards outweigh the risks. besides, when you are the axis, you’re at a disadvantage to start. If you want to play a game that takes forever to play and you will most assuredly lose then that is your choice. I prefer to take the bull by the horns, go balls out and see if evil can prevail! Trust me you do not want to play me. I’m your worst nightmare, because I’m crazy and smart.