Starting Techs for Nations

I am thinking of adding a third research table to our G40 games. I believe one or more might have been suggested already.

1. Self-Propelled Artillery Artillery can move 2 spaces and can blitz when paired with tanks. Infantry and mechanized infantry paired 1:1 with SPA attack at 2.
2. Super Carrier Aircraft Carriers can transport 3 aircraft (fighters and tactical bombers).
3. High Speed Transport Destroyers can transport 1 or 2 infantry
4. Convoy Escorts Enemy units disrupting convoys ignore roles of 3 or more.
5. Mine Layers Destroyers can lay mines instead of moving, attacking or defending. Anti-Submarine rules are not applicable when laying mines. SZ that is mined do not impact friendly units. Enemy units entering a mined SZ roll 1d for each ship. Each ship that rolls a 6 is hit by a mine. Aircraft on carries that hit a mine can fly to a friendly territory or carrier up to 5 spaces away; if there are no applicable territories or carriers then aircraft are lost. Mined SZ is cleared after enemy contact.
6. Improved Transports Transports can carry 2 infantry plus one additional ground unit

@zawodowiec777 said in Event Cards - Weather, Tech, Tactical, etc.:

Can I get your mechanics ?

PM me your e mail. Ill send you my list.

The vichy rules reminds me of the one from xeno games.  I think their’s was to roll for the fleet like yours except uk and germany each got one chance at the fleet and 2-4 was scuttle. I like your idea of rolling for individual ships. Maybe make it individual sz’s?

On the territories they rolled 50-50 free or vichy. If it went vichy it and everything in it turned german. I think the allies were allowed to use free french areas any way they wanted,but if they actually attacked a FF territory to take control of it, all remaining FF turned vichy. If FIC went vichy it went to japan.

It went something like that anyways.

@toblerone77:

I’m just going to say something here. Excluding your math Baron. The whole point of this rule was to open up a way for SBR against ICs with a loose historical basis. The loose historical depiction of night bombing was to give the attacker a less risky SBR but the penalty was less risk=less reward.

Given the basic concept, I think it is viable. I liked the idea of night fighters but thought it best to drop them. That’s my POV. An SBR that drops interceptors/escort could simulate this simply.

I encourage everyone to post as they like. Personally I like the idea of simply eliminating escorts and interceptors for night raids and reducing AA fire 1@D12. Damage totals are halved. That’s just what I like.

Everyone else, carry on.

Hi Toblerone77,
I don’t know if you play 1942 second edition, but within the optional rule for SBR escort and interception it becomes viable to have such thing as StB playing a role as Night-fighter, because the odds are clearly different from G40 during the regular SBR with escort: all Fgs and StB A1 first strike, while Fg D2.

All you have to do to implement a 1942.2 Night bombing & Night Fighter HR is this when playing with escort and interception optional rule:

Day SBR damage on IC becomes 1D6+2/StB, instead of just D6.

During 1942.2 Night SBR, the damage becomes D6-1/StB (or D6+2 halved rounding down, if you prefer).

In addition, all attacking StBs and defending StB Night-fighters roll a regular A/D@1, same as G40 SBR escort and interception rule.

The AAA fire @1 in both cases, Day or Night SBRs.

These 2 things will make all the basics 1:1, StB vs Fg/StB Night Fg, balance.

Day SBR:
StB vs AAA, damage + 4.583 - casualty 2.0 = +2.583 IPC damage/StB
StB vs Fg+AAA,  damage + 4.977 - casualty 4.777 = + 0.2 IPC damage/StB

Night SBR:
StB vs AAA, damage +2.083 - casualty 2.0 = +.083 IPC damage/StB
StB vs StB NF+AAA, damage +3.736 - casualty 3.667 = + 0.069 IPCs damage/StB run

So, Night SBR is better when there is more than 1 Fg defending an IC, and it is still an even match for both sides (near 0 IPC) to throw 1 StB against a StB NightF.

But, if there is only 1 Fg on the IC, the Day SBR is still positively better (.2 vs .069).

In addition, there is less StB and money in 1942.2 compared to G40, so there is lesser chance that StBs presence will forbids any Night SBR.

To summarize the viable SBR tactics with this 1942.2 HR:

No Fgs on IC, go for Day-SBR 2 or more Fgs on IC, go for Night-SBR unless there is more than 1 Night-Fg for 1 StB raider. Keeping a 1 Fg + (1 StB :1 Fg) advantage for Day bombing is better. Or staying within the 1 StB and 1 Fg vs 2 Fgs is the lower limit, it is still viable around 0.00 IPC/StB run.
So, going 1:1 vs Day or Night is almost the same risks involved, but with less damage & casualty in Night SBR.

What do you think of this?

Now, Night Bombing can be viable in both games.

Here is the calculation basis for this 1942.2 Night bombing with Night Fgs House Rule:

OOB 1942.2: 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
5/6 StB survived * 3.5 IPCs = 2.9 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *12 IPCs = -2 IPCs
Sum: 2.9 - 2 = +.9 IPC damage/StB

OOB 1942.2 SBR with D6 damage:
1 StB A1 first strike against 1 intercepting Fg D2

StB roll (D6)/Fg roll / AAA roll

161= 6/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg killed: 2.78%
165= 30/216 no casualty vs 1 Fg killed: 13.89%

526= 60/216 StB killed by Fg: 27.78%
541= 20/216 StB killed by AAA: 9.25%
545= 100/216 both survived: 46.3%

Results with :
60.19% * ((1+6) IPCs)/2= +3.5 IPCs) = 2.107 IPCs
16.67% killing Fg *+10 IPC = + 1.667 IPC
39.81% StB killed *-12 IPCs = - 4.777 IPCs

Sum: 3.774 - 4.777 = - 1.0 IPC damage/StB

1942.2 HR damage D6+2 : 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
5/6 StB survived * 5.5 IPCs = 4.583 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *12 IPCs = -2 IPCs
Sum: 4.583 - 2.0 = +2.583 IPC damage/StB

1942.2 SBR HR with D6+2 damage:
1 StB A1 first strike against 1 intercepting Fg D2

StB roll (D6)/Fg roll / AAA roll

161= 6/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg killed: 2.78%
165= 30/216 no casualty vs 1 Fg killed: 13.89%

526= 60/216 StB killed by Fg: 27.78%
541= 20/216 StB killed by AAA: 9.25%
545= 100/216 both survived: 46.3%

Results with :
60.19% * ((1+2) + (6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = 3.31 IPCs
16.67% killing Fg *+10 IPC = + 1.667 IPC
39.81% StB killed *-12 IPCs = - 4.777 IPCs
Sum: 4.977 - 4.777 = + 0.2 IPC damage/StB

HR for 1942 with StB as Nightfighter interceptor all A1/D1 as in G40 interception rule, damage at D6-1:

1 StB A1 vs 1 StB D1 doing interception

StB roll /Fg roll / AAA roll

116= 6/216 1 StB killed by StB NF vs 1 StB NF killed: 2.78%
151= 5/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 StB NF killed: 2.31%
155= 25/216 no casualty vs 1 StB NF killed: 11.57%

516= 30/216 StB killed by StB NF: 13.89%
551= 25/216 StB killed by AAA: 11.57%
555= 125/216 both survived: 57.87%

Results:
69.44% * ((0+5) IPCs)/2= + 2.5 IPCs) = 1.736 IPCs
16.67% killing StBNFg *+12 IPCs = + 2.00 IPC
30.55% StB killed *-12 IPCs = - 3.667 IPCs

Sum: 3.736 - 3.667 = + 0.069 IPCs damage/StB run

1942.2 HR damage D6-1: 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
5/6 StB survived * 2.5 IPCs = 2.083 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *12 IPCs = -2 IPCs
Sum: +2.083 - 2 = +.083 IPC damage/StB

1942.2, damage D6+2: 1 StB & 1 Fg A1 first strike doing Day-SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D2

StB+Fg rolls/interceptors Fgs roll/ AAA roll = odds   casualties

1/3636/361/6   = 36/7776      1 StB killed by AAA vs 2 Fgs : .5%
1/3636/365/6 = 180/7776      no casualty vs 2 Fgs : 2.3%

10/3612/361/6 = 120/7776    1 Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg : 1.5%
10/3612/365/6 = 600/7776    1 Fg  vs 1 Fg : 7.7%
10/3624/361/6=  240/7776    1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg : 3.1%
10/3624/365/6 = 1200/7776   no casualty vs 1 Fg : 15.4%

25/364/366/6   = 600/7776    1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fg vs no casualty : 7.7%
25/3616/361/6 = 400/7776    1 Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty : 5.2%
25/3616/365/6 = 2000/7776  1 Fg vs no casualty : 25.7%
25/3616/361/6 = 400/7776    1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty : 5.2%
25/3616/365/6 = 2000/7776   no casualty at all : 25.7%

Results:
Bombard on IC: 76.8% * ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = 4.224 IPCs
Killing 2 Fgs: 2.8%+20 IPCs =   + 0.56 IPC
Killing 1 Fg: 27.7% +10 IPCs =  + 2.77 IPCs
Fg killed: 33.4%-10 IPCs =        - 3.34 IPCs
StB killed: 8.8%-12 IPCs =       - 1.056 IPCs
StB & Fg killed: 14.4%*-22 IPCs = - 3.168 IPCs

Sum: 7.554 - 7.564 = - 0.01 IPCs damage/StB

just because USA has more capacity, doesn’t mean it can produce units cheaper.
Quote
Reduction in cost per unit resulting from increased production, realized through operational efficiencies.

THAT is what ‘economies of scale’ mean.  Operational efficiencies can be view in terms of {technological} improvements in manufacturing procedures.  Procedures do not necessarily require robots.  Better Rivets (materials) or better training (labor) or better materials delivery systems (just in time) are all realized without robots.

These efficiencies come at a higher economic cost. They are not born out of low income economies. Just look at how many small economies can produce battleships at a lower cost than a larger economy. They don’t exist if you compare quality. If you can show me an example thats fine. The largest economies can do this mush more effectively than a smaller economy, so “economies of scale” also has the meaning that the greater investment of money will necessarily lead to a greater efficiency of effort.

“refers to the cost advantages that a business obtains due to expansion. There are factors that cause a producer’s average cost per unit to fall as the scale of output is increased.”

I look at this as the more income you got for investment, the greater the potential for economies of scale. So to me these are built in factories assumed by the larger, burgeoning economies in the game.

“…since some economies of scale may require a larger market than is possible within a particular country — for example, it would not be efficient for Liechtenstein to have its own car maker, if they would only sell to their local market.”

Another indication. Italy in the game would be less capable of this compared to USA or Germany.

Perhaps rather than a tech for every 20 IPC lead the combined axis or allies have over the other side receives a -1 cost benefit for naval. that would model “economies of scale” a bit better IMO rather than paying some dude in a white lab coat 5 IPC to “invent” a cash poor nations way of getting cheaper battleships, when another nation much larger is somehow paying a 20% markup for the same battleship but has 3 times to economy to do it.

We have to agree to disagree.

russia
“russian winter” every 4 turns its winter and nobody cannot attack

i said that wrong nobody in russias original TT can attack and axis cant move so cant attack and cant retret under my rules but russia can

That would make a nice NA under ANZAC.

Perhaps the American player can place one infantry in those territories from new units, rather than convert British to American. I am sure the British had troops in this area and would seem your fixing one problem, but creating another under your idea. I think ANZAC should be additional forces, but placement staggered one INF per turn from builds.

Ok let me clarify my thoughts on that… They wouldn’t necessarily have to pursue a historic goal, but rather go for completing a certain amount of techs (3 for example)…

GG