HBG units "Custom" Rules question (Global game)


  • 2017 '16

    @toblerone77:

    Baron you have good posts and ideas. However I’m not looking to create rules that are so complicated or intricate. This game gets really slow as it is. **I’m willing to give away some historicity and some realism for fun and a session you can actually complete in a day.

    Consider the fact that it took 4 Shermans to take out one Tiger. The US could simply churn them out as needed, and the Army basically knew how lethal The Tiger was hence three Sherman would basically play distraction while the fourth would try to get a lucky shot and disable the Tiger.**

    Even when we’re using “macro” vision mechanics of A&A, a Tiger division still out classes it’s medium tank division opponent greatly.

    It’s not that I’m saying you’re wrong I just have a different idea. You seem to be looking to create the simulation A&A experience. I’m trying to go for the “I’m a married guy who doesn’t get to play a lot” beer and pretzels experience.

    It is also part of the game to bring to the battle, and on the battle board, those terrifying Tiger, so the enemy have some sense of fear of the presence of these Heavy Armor.  😄


  • Customizer

    @Baron:

    @toblerone77:

    Baron you have good posts and ideas. However I’m not looking to create rules that are so complicated or intricate. This game gets really slow as it is. I’m willing to give away some historicity and some realism for fun and a session you can actually complete in a day.

    It’s not that I’m saying you’re wrong I just have a different idea. You seem to be looking to create the simulation A&A experience. I’m trying to go for the “I’m a married guy who doesn’t get to play a lot” beer and pretzels experience.

    You and Flashman are probably more like minded than You and I. I don’t mean that to be rude it’s just we all want different things out of the game.

    I don’t see what is adding more complexity on ground units: because it is still the same A/D/M/C/ hits/unit and so forth.

    What is adding time, is the time take to select units to invest in.
    If you take time to pick every single and different sculpt, and want something more than just “eye candy”, you must come with some real difference between those units.
    Isn’t it?

    As for the Panther and Tiger I’d probably just give them the same set of stats for the sake of simplicity. No they aren’t the same tank but close enough on a macro scale. There are several light tanks I don’t really want to make stats for every light tank. Germany has two from HBG right now. The 35t and the Panzer II. I wouldn’t bother giving them different stats. I’m also not criticizing your work either. I just wouldn’t bother putting a repair feature on a heavy tank. I’d consider repairs “built-in” to the piece as we see re-supply is not modeled into the game. A damaged heavy tank would simply be a division reduced in strength rather than an actual damaged unit. Before someone mentions it I’d 86 the BB/CV repair rule.

    Just out of curiosity do have the HBG units? Call it an intangible factor but when you have all the actual pieces in front of you set up on a board it does make a difference on how you view the game. The same intangible factor that occurs when your running a solo scenario and you hear that sound of the dice shaking versus a dice roller on a computer screen. You’ll think about it differently.

    As for “eye candy”, it is really cool to set up the board with various mixtures of units. Your first turn you may place Panzer II’s on the board and as the game closes you might start placing Tigers and Me-262’s.

    Honestly I’m curious as to where you come up with your ideas. Everybody plays different. Everybody started playing at different times and with different editions. I only mention this because many of the ideas you express have a more “hex and tile” gaming scenario. A more traditional war game flavor.


  • 2017 '16

    Just out of curiosity do have the HBG units?

    Not actually, but I got the 1942 1st and 2e edition, 1940 Global,  1941 and the classic 1942(?) from Milton Bradley.
    There is already different sculpt in it. Specially the Tiger in the 1941 edition.

    Honestly I’m curious as to where you come up with your ideas. Everybody plays different. Everybody started playing at different times and with different editions.

    I played first on Milton Bradley.
    Then I add the David Schwartzer World War II extension to Axis and Allies which introduced: destroyer escort, destroyer, cruiser, Hellcats and zero, 2 hits carrier and battleships.
    So when I bought Spring 1942, I was already prepared to the new units.

    Most of my ideas in fact are picked inside the actual set of rules and mixing them in different ways.

    Sometimes I bent them a bit, but when I do it, I don’t like it very much because it goes against simplicity and familiarity with some OOB rules.

    So it drives me more to think deeper and find something inside the various rules already in use.

    Sometimes I fall upon old posts of mine and even for me, I see how hard it is to read (the long ones) and  understand  them because it requires concentration and intense focus on a specific topic.

    I think it is what happen when someone is reading a rulebook, at first it is easier but the more we read the more we have to stay focus on everything said.

    Actually I’m just exploring these various units in hope of finding a way to introduce a balance heavy tank for the Tiger sculpt of 1941.


  • Customizer

    @Baron:

    Just out of curiosity do have the HBG units?

    Not actually, but I got the 1942 1st and 2e edition, 1940 Global,  1941 and the classic 1942(?) from Milton Bradley.
    There is already different sculpt in it. Specially the Tiger in the 1941 edition.

    Honestly I’m curious as to where you come up with your ideas. Everybody plays different. Everybody started playing at different times and with different editions.

    I played first on Milton Bradley.
    Then I introduce the David Schwartzer World War II extension to Axis and Allies which introduced: destroyer escort, destroyer, cruiser, Hellcats and zero, 2 hits carrier and battleships.
    So when I bought Spring 1942, I was already prepared to the new units.

    Most of my ideas in fact are picked inside the actual set of rules and mixing them in different ways.

    Sometimes I bent them a bit, but when I do it, I don’t like it very much because it goes against simplicity and familiarity with some OOB rules.

    So it drives me more to think deeper and find something inside the various rules already in use.

    Sometimes I fall upon old posts of mine and even for me, I see how hard it is to read (the long ones) and  understand  them because it requires concentration and intense focus on a specific topic.

    I think it is what happen when someone is reading a rulebook, at first it is easier but the more we read the more we have to stay focus on everything said.

    Actually I’m just exploring these various units in hope of finding a way to introduce a balance heavy tank for the Tiger sculpt of 1941.

    Ahhh I see. Yeah a lot of folks see G40 as really complicated and in a way it is, for a board game. I used to have some old war games from the 70’s and 80’s with much more complex rules. When I first played A&A we played usually one or two days a week all day and we used to have rules for weather, politics, etc… that kind of stuff.  We thought about doing a “fog of war” game with two MB Classic editions. I do get where you’re coming from. I’m lucky if I can ever get a game of AA41 or 42SE every few months.

    On another note you would probably like the World at War or Tide of Iron series you should check those out. They’re both different but they incorporate some of the elements you talk about.


  • 2017 '16

    Thanks for the advice.

    If you still have time, see the next post below.


  • 2017 '16

    @Baron:

    However,
    if  I try to input this one (since there is a 1941 sculpt for it.)
    Slow Heavy Tank (Tiger)    A4D4M1C7, 2 hits, no blitz, give +1A to TcB when paired with.

    Raise the question:
    7 OOB tank A3D3M2, 1 hit are they better than 6 Tiger A4D4M1, 2 hits ?

    A21D21M2, 7 hits vs A24D24M1, 12 hits
    (or vs 6 Inf+ 6 Art= A24D24M1, 12 hits = 5% for OOB tank vs 95% survival for the Inf+Art).

    Is it a real balance match?
    Without the 2 hits: it is 49% for OOB vs 45 % for Tiger chance of survival

    Maybe the 2 hits for ground units required to destroy a damaged unit before damaging another instead of the regular take 6 damage on 6 Tiger before loosing 1 (as we will do with 3 or 4 BB in the same SZ).

    This 2 options are clearly different:
    A) after 2 hits, only 5 Tigers fire.
    Maybe it is around 15% chance of survival for regular OOB Tanks.

    B) after 6 hits,  still 6 Tigers fire.
    And it is .2% chance of survival for regular OOB Tanks.

    You see, I’m thinking out loud…

    It is clear now that introducing this Tiger will be unbalancing.
    Maybe at
    Tiger A4D4M1C8, 2 hits, no blitz, +1A to TcB.
    At least it will cost 4 IPCs/hit for this tank.

    The battle between OOB vs Tiger come like this:
    4 A3D3M2C6 vs 3 A4D4M1C8, 2 hits
    A12D12C24, 4 hits vs A12D12M1C24, 6 hits for 3 units.
    6% of survival        vs  91% of survival (taking hits like BB)

    Are the odds too unbalance for OOB?

    We must not forget however that OOB tank are M2, and mobility is a great advantage.

    6 OOB Artillery  A2D2M1= A12D12M1C24, 6 hits for 6 units.

    Which type of unit will prevail?
    Any guess?

    72% of survival for 3 Tigers A4 (taking hit as BB) vs 25% for the 6 Artillery D2.

    I still maintain the special rule for 2 hits ground units that :
    the 2 hits for ground units required to destroy a damaged unit before damaging another.
    However, any damage ground unit which survived is repaired at the beginning of the next owner’s turn.

    In this way,
    OOB 4 tank will survive around 36% vs 60% for Tiger (aprox. with AACalc).
    And
    OOB 6 Art will survive around 60% vs 35% for Tiger  (aprox. with AACalc).

    Which both seems more acceptable to me than preceding Tiger at 7 IPCs cost.


  • Customizer

    Baron if your goal is to intro Tigers/Heavy Armor into your game and you play primarily five player editions of A&A, I would use these stats for the Tiger and JS2:

    A4-D4-M2-C8 It’s only one unit. All nations are able buy them. you could also limit them to only so many units at a time on the board.


  • Customizer

    @Baron:

    @Baron:

    However,
    if  I try to input this one (since there is a 1941 sculpt for it.)
    Slow Heavy Tank (Tiger)    A4D4M1C7, 2 hits, no blitz, give +1A to TcB when paired with.

    Raise the question:
    7 OOB tank A3D3M2, 1 hit are they better than 6 Tiger A4D4M1, 2 hits ?

    A21D21M2, 7 hits vs A24D24M1, 12 hits
    (or vs 6 Inf+ 6 Art= A24D24M1, 12 hits = 5% for OOB tank vs 95% survival for the Inf+Art).

    Is it a real balance match?
    Without the 2 hits: it is 49% for OOB vs 45 % for Tiger chance of survival

    Maybe the 2 hits for ground units required to destroy a damaged unit before damaging another instead of the regular take 6 damage on 6 Tiger before loosing 1 (as we will do with 3 or 4 BB in the same SZ).

    This 2 options are clearly different:
    A) after 2 hits, only 5 Tigers fire.
    Maybe it is around 15% chance of survival for regular OOB Tanks.

    B) after 6 hits,  still 6 Tigers fire.
    And it is .2% chance of survival for regular OOB Tanks.

    You see, I’m thinking out loud…

    It is clear now that introducing this Tiger will be unbalancing.
    Maybe at
    Tiger A4D4M1C8, 2 hits, no blitz, +1A to TcB.
    At least it will cost 4 IPCs/hit for this tank.

    The battle between OOB vs Tiger come like this:
    4 A3D3M2C6 vs 3 A4D4M1C8, 2 hits
    A12D12C24, 4 hits vs A12D12M1C24, 6 hits for 3 units.
    6% of survival        vs  91% of survival (taking hits like BB)

    Are the odds too unbalance for OOB?

    We must not forget however that OOB tank are M2, and mobility is a great advantage.

    6 OOB Artillery  A2D2M1= A12D12M1C24, 6 hits for 6 units.

    Which type of unit will prevail?
    Any guess?

    72% of survival for 3 Tigers A4 (taking hit as BB) vs 25% for the 6 Artillery D2.

    Is still maintain the special rule for 2 hits ground units that :
    the 2 hits for ground units required to destroy a damaged unit before damaging another.
    However, any damage ground unit which survived is repaired at the beginning of the next owner’s turn.

    In this way,
    OOB 4 tank will survive around 36% vs 60% for Tiger (aprox. with AACalc).
    And
    OOB 6 Art will survive around 60% vs 35% for Tiger  (aprox. with AACalc).

    Which both seems more acceptable to me than preceding Tiger at 7 IPCs cost.

    After reading this I think this is the best option.


  • 2017 '16

    @toblerone77:

    Baron if your goal is to intro Tigers/Heavy Armor into your game and you play primarily five player editions of A&A, I would use these stats for the Tiger and JS2:

    A4-D4-M2-C8 It’s only one unit. All nations are able buy them. you could also limit them to only so many units at a time on the board.

    That would means that:
    4 OOB tanks  A3 D3 M2 C6    3 Tigers A4 D4 M2 C8, 1 hit only
    A12D12M2C24  vs  A12D12M2C24

    65%           vs          25%       odds of survival.

    It becomes a kind of cruiser vs BB issue.

    Why bother to buy them since you get a better punch with regular tank?


  • 2017 '16

    After reading this I think this is the best option.

    Thanks for sharing your advice.
    I appreciate it very much.
    I will probably try it on my next game.

    Allowing buying of Panther A4 D3 M2 C7, 1 hit (on third turn) and of
    Tiger A4 D4 M1 C8, 2 hits (on fourth turn).


  • 2017 '16

    @Baron:

    Which one is a better buy:
    7 OOB Tank A21 D21 M2 C42, 7 hits vs 6 Panther tank (A4 D3 M2 C7) A24 D18 M2 C42, 6 hits?
    75% for OOB tank on offence  vs 21%
    49% for OOB  tank on defense vs 45% Panther on offence.

    Maybe this one is well-balance?

    Of course 6 Panthers attacking A4 vs 6 Inf+ 6 Art= A24 D24 M1 C42, 12 hits.
    3.5% odds of survival for Panther vs 96%.

    6 Panthers D3 on defense, it is very awfull:
    1% odds of survival for Panther vs 99%.

    The lesser units are as usual and intended by A&A system more able to survive a direct battle.

    Maybe Panthers are still too weak on defense…

    It needs more calculation:
    6 Panthers D4 on defense A24 D24 M2 C42, 6 hits vs 6 Inf+ 6 Art= A24 D24 M1 C42, 12 hits.
    3.5% odds of survival for Panther vs 96%.
    Same odds either Off or Def. of course.

    But now, 6 Panthers defending 6 A24 D24 M2 C42, 6 hits vs 7 OOB Tank A21 D21 M2 C42, 7 hits
    will get the same as said above about Panthers on offense:

    49% for OOB  on offence vs 45% Panther on defense.

    Finally,7 OOB Tank A21 D21 M2 C42, 7 hits vs 6 Inf+ 6 Art= A24 D24 M1 C42, 12 hits.
    5% odds of survival for OOB Tank vs 94% for Inf and Art.

    So I come with this stat for Panthers as Fast Heavy Tank: A4 D4 M2 C7, 1 hit, can blitz, can be paired with TcB giving it A4.

    Intuitively we believe Panthers are better than OOB Tank but, statistically, they are a little less effective on an IPCs vs IPCs basis against OOB Medium Tank.

    Nevertheless, Panthers gives an effective higher punch for offense or defense.
    But it is no match against any Inf and Art. sheer number.


  • 2017 '16

    @Baron:

    @Baron:

    Which one is a better buy:
    7 OOB Tank A21 D21 M2 C42, 7 hits vs 6 Panther tank (A4 D3 M2 C7) A24 D18 M2 C42, 6 hits?
    75% for OOB tank on offence  vs 21%
    49% for OOB  tank on defense vs 45% Panther on offence.

    Maybe this one is well-balance?

    Of course 6 Panthers attacking A4 vs 6 Inf+ 6 Art= A24 D24 M1 C42, 12 hits.
    3.5% odds of survival for Panther vs 96%.

    6 Panthers D3 on defense, it is very awful:
    1% odds of survival for Panther vs 99%.

    The lesser units are as usual and intended by A&A system more able to survive a direct battle.

    Maybe Panthers are still too weak on defense…

    It needs more calculation:
    6 Panthers D4 on defense A24 D24 M2 C42, 6 hits vs 6 Inf+ 6 Art= A24 D24 M1 C42, 12 hits.
    3.5% odds of survival for Panther vs 96%.
    Same odds either Off or Def. of course.

    But now, 6 Panthers defending 6 A24 D24 M2 C42, 6 hits vs 7 OOB Tank A21 D21 M2 C42, 7 hits
    will get the same as said above about Panthers on offense:

    49% for OOB  on offence vs 45% Panther on defense.

    Finally,7 OOB Tank A21 D21 M2 C42, 7 hits vs 6 Inf+ 6 Art= A24 D24 M1 C42, 12 hits.
    5% odds of survival for OOB Tank vs 94% for Inf and Art.

    So I come with this stat for Panthers as Fast Heavy Tank: A4 D4 M2 C7, 1 hit, can blitz, can be paired with TcB giving it A4.

    Intuitively we believe Panthers are better than OOB Tank but, statistically, they are a little less effective on an IPCs vs IPCs basis against OOB Medium Tank.

    Nevertheless, Panthers gives an effective higher punch for offense or defense.
    But it is no match against any Inf and Art. sheer number.

    Here comes the last question on balancing these 2 units Tiger vs Panther.
    7 Tigers A4 D4 M1 C8, 2 hits = A28 D28 M1 C56, 14 hits 7 units vs 8 Panthers A4 D4 M2 C7, 1 hit = A32 D32 M2 C56, 8 hits.

    73 % odds of survival vs 28% (approx. based on AACalc) under the special rules:

    For ground units only, it requires to destroy a damaged unit (Tiger) before damaging another same unit (Tiger).
    However, any damage ground to a unit (Tiger) which survived is repaired at the beginning of the next owner’s turn at no cost.

    It seems correct that a less mobile units have better chance to destroy another more versatile one even if it is cheaper (here 1 IPCs less).

    Here are the final stats for these 2 ground units:

    Panther as Fast Heavy Tank: A4 D4 M2 C7, 1 hit, can blitz, can be paired with TcB giving it A4.

    Tiger as Slow Heavy Tank: A4 D4 M1 C8, 2 hits, no blitz, can be paired with TcB giving it A4.


  • 2020 2019 2018 2017 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    @Baron:

    Panther as Fast Heavy Tank: A4D4M2C7, 1 hit, can blitz, can be paired with TcB giving it A4.
    Tiger as Slow Heavy Tank: A4D4M1C8, 2 hits, no blitz, can be paired with TcB giving it A4.

    At the time of WWII, with the engine technology available, a “fast heavy tank” would have been a contradiction in terms.  Generally speaking, the heavier a tank became, the slower it became.  A WWII heavy tank, more or less by definition, was a tank which traded lower speed for greatly improved armour protection and/or firepower (the MAUS being perhaps the best example of this principle).  Or to put it another way, WWII tanks can categorized based on whether they followed one of two basic design approaches: whether the design tried to achieve a good balance between the three elements of firepower, protection and mobility, or whether they emphasized one (or two) of those elements at the expense of the other two (or one).  The Panther was a medium tank both in terms of its size and of its balanced-design philosophy; it had very good performance in all three of its design elements, but it wasn’t a “fast heavy tank”.  Nowadays, with gas-turbine technology and with advanced armours which provide a high protection-to-weight ratio, it’s possible to build 120mm-gun-armed tanks which, by WWII standards, would have been regarded as both fast and heavy, but in modern terms they’re classified as main battle tanks.


  • 2017 '16

    The real Heavy Tank can be the J-S 2 for Allies.

    And an improved Medium Tank could it be the T-34/85?
    But there is probably no distinctive sculpt from a T-34/76.

    Any suggestion for a sculpt to find equivalent unit for an Allies “Panther”?

    Perhaps the Heavy Tank M26 Pershing? (if there is a sculpt?)
    A British Cromwell (A-27) or the better built Comet (A-34) (which was latter introduce in Dec 1944)?


  • 2017 '16

    @CWO:

    @Baron:

    Panther as Fast Heavy Tank: A4D4M2C7, 1 hit, can blitz, can be paired with TcB giving it A4.
    Tiger as Slow Heavy Tank: A4D4M1C8, 2 hits, no blitz, can be paired with TcB giving it A4.

    At the time of WWII, with the engine technology available, a “fast heavy tank” would have been a contradiction in terms.  Generally speaking, the heavier a tank became, the slower it became.  A WWII heavy tank, more or less by definition, was a tank which traded lower speed for greatly improved armour protection and/or firepower (the MAUS being perhaps the best example of this principle).  Or to put it another way, WWII tanks can categorized based on whether they followed one of two basic design approaches: whether the design tried to achieve a good balance between the three elements of firepower, protection and mobility, or whether they emphasized one (or two) of those elements at the expense of the other two (or one).  The Panther was a medium tank both in terms of its size and of its balanced-design philosophy; it had very good performance in all three of its design elements, but it wasn’t a “fast heavy tank”.  Nowadays, with gas-turbine technology and with advanced armours which provide a high protection-to-weight ratio, it’s possible to build 120mm-gun-armed tanks which, by WWII standards, would have been regarded as both fast and heavy, but in modern terms they’re classified as main battle tanks.

    You got it right. I name both according to their game stats: Panther M2 vs Tiger M1

    How would you name it?

    Because Panther (45 tons) 30 MPH/ 160 Miles have better operational range  than Tigers (I 57 / II 70  tons)  24 MPH / 120 Miles.

    Since Medium Tank reference is for the Panzer IV (25 tons) 26 MPH/ 120 Miles vs T-34 (26 tons) 33 MPH / 250 miles.

    Improved Medium Tank?
    Armoured Medium Tank?
    Later developed Medium Tank?

    Long Range Medium Tank vs Short Range Heavy Tank?

    As you can see, Panther has almost double weight of the Panzer IV.


  • 2017 '16

    @toblerone77:

    I have every battle piece HBG sells with the exception of the new Japanese units. Doing this in D6 is difficult but do-able. I’ll keep you posted.

    Here’s one idea though: Use your TD’s like AAA guns but for tanks on defense. Offensively they operate like a medium tank attacking at 3. Remember also Germany has five tank types, the allies have potentially three classes if you use the AA41 JS-2 tanks for UK and USA heavy tanks as well as Russia.

    😉


  • 2017 '16

    @SpitfirED:

    I know this topic has been dormant for some time but thought it would be better to say here that I play with heavy tanks on a cost: 7/ att and def: 4 basis but with a move of just 1.

    I like to keep house rules ruthlessly simple and eliminating the suggested heavy tank non combat move of 2 also helps to ensure the unit doesn’t become too overpowering. (Also helped by the fact that I also play with heavy artillery on a cost 5, att/def 3 and move 1 basis so both attacker and defender have access to a unit with +1 hit for +1IPC compared to OOB).

    🙂


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 5
  • 85
  • 1
  • 3
  • 3
  • 7
  • 3
  • 18
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

55
Online

13.9k
Users

34.2k
Topics

1.3m
Posts