Welcome! If you're a returning member of the forums, please reset your password. If you don't receive an email within minutes, it means your account is listed under another, likely older, email address. Contact webmaster@axisandallies.org for help.

Convoy Disruption for 1942.2 & G40 Submarine economic warfare


  • 2017 2016

    @Baron:

    7. A convoy which has been Disrupted becomes Operational when…

    I thought that we were pretty close on an agreement that the owner should pay 1 IPC to flip NCM face upward when it is his Collect Income phase? It was simpler than anything else, even moving DD in convoy SZ to flip upward NCM.

    Did you have something else in mind?
    About Convoy Destruction, I’m not a great fan either.

    I just believe that 1 IPC cost can represent everything from cargo lost and ship wreckage.
    I see it as a partial damage to convoy made by Sub, not a total destruction.
    If all ships and their load (of 2 IPCs) would have been lost, the replacement cost would probably be greater than total income which could be made in a single travel (2 IPCs).

    About the Raiding/Disrupting mechanism, do you have an idea?

    Any 1 Submarine or Battleship raiding a Convoy Zone: auto destroy of 1 NCM 2 IPCs.*

    When there is warships defending the Convoy SZ,
    except for Battleship, attacking surface warships and planes makes regular combat BUT all Convoys are safe.
    So any one can use a DD blocker to protect the Convoy SZ.

    When Battleships or Submarines are part of the battle, the attacker can choose to assign a Submarine’s or Battleship’s hit to the Convoy, instead of an enemy warship chosen by the owner’s (as OOB combat rule for casualty).

    This simply means that with Subs or Battleships, as long as they aren’t sink by defenders units, the attacker can destroy enemy units AND 1 NCM Convoy per combat round per Sub or per Battleship.

    In this case, the Convoy is played as an additional free hit for the defender (like these puts on Carrier or Battleship) without loosing a combat unit.

    Do you prefer this method?
    @Black_Elk:

    Well, the simplest and most familiar method would be to just say these convoys work exactly like the convoys of the Original A&A Europe game (1999.)

    In that case, there was no specialized “convoy attack” or “convoy defense.” It wasn’t a combat per se, so much as a combat movement. In that game, if a convoy zone was defenseless (no protecting warships) then all the raider had to do was enter/pass through the zone to deny their opponent the cash. If their opponent left a ship in the zone to defend the convoy, then this ship had to be destroyed first, and any attacking warship that survived the engagement would then occupy the sz denying the cash to the opponent.
    That’s the most basic National Convoy system I can think of. Of course, we could try to improve on it with additional elements, but if you wanted to keep things as simple as possible, it might be worth just using those rules as the base.

    The whole point of creating a convoy system to begin with, in my view, is to attach IPC values directly to the Sea Zones in some way. Clearly this is an abstraction, even in real world terms. We’re not talking about fishermen pulling fish out of the sea, but rather the idea of a “Trade”, or National exchange, the concept that the same resources/goods can accrue in value, if you’re able to move them farther afield. In my suggested example, that’s what the +3 ipcs would represent, a bonus to the nation’s normal national production when it’s able to move across the sea.

    In that respect I still think it is more fruitful to conceive of the convoy as a “shipping lane” rather than the actual ships/goods travelling along it. If you control the lane, it is possible to move the resources to a place where they have more value. If the lane is being contested, then you will lose that value (or at least some of that value), because now the logistics cost involved in defending/moving the goods will necessarily increase.

    Keeping the broader gameplay in mind, the advantage of having convoys, is to encourage the purchase of more naval units. Just having more money in play (which the convoys would introduce) helps to facilitate this, but players are even more likely to buy ships, if that additional income is directly attached to a SZ rather than exclusively to land territories, as it is OOB, because then you need ships to disrupt it.

    At every point along the way, you have to make a compromise. A&A is just too simplistic to model everything. It might be entirely conceivable for aircraft to sink a convoy vessel in the real world, and this surely happened in the war, but it’s worth considering whether the game really needs to model this? In A&A Europe (1999) it was not possible for Aircraft to disrupt convoy income, you had to have a ship. Not to suggest that we can’t improve on this, and somehow involve Air in the convoy disruption/defense, but just pointing out that it’s not strictly necessary.

    I think there comes a point in these games, where the rules can get away from the gameplay enjoyment, if a mechanic is too complicated or if it’s application is too rare. It’s worth keeping in mind that players of the 1940/Global games have different expectations and more tolerance for complex rules, but for a game like 1942.2 I definitely favor simplicity. Put another way, it might be best to work out a bare bones system for 1942.2, and then build onto it for the 1940 games, if you want to add extra steps or nuances to the mechanics of it.


  • 2017 2016

    @Baron:

    @CWO:

    I agree that 1941 would be a good test-bed for developing the NCHR. Excellent suggestion.

    5. Each convoy has a value of 2 IPCs when it is Operational and 0 IPCs when it is Disrupted. A convoy which is Operational is indicated on the map using a face-up convoy marker. A convoy which is Disrupted is indicated on the map using a face-down convoy marker. Convoy markers are never removed from the map.

    COMMENT: A two-tier system (with a value of either 2 or 0) is much simpler than a 3-tier system (with a value of 2 or 1 or 0), so that’s the most straightforward option for the core system. I’m assuming that 2 is a good value for Operational convoys – but if you feel that 1 or 3 would be better, that’s an easy change to make.

    6. Convoy income is generally not affected when the control of land territories passes from one power to another power. If, however, a particular power does not control at the Collect Income stage any land territories that are adjacent to a SZ, it cannot collect convoy income. In such a situation, that power’s convoy markers are covered by a poker chip (without changing their face-up or face-down position) and the game’s income-tracking is adjusted accordingly. If that power later regains control of a coastal territory, the chips are removed from the convoy markers and the game’s income-tracking is adjusted to show that convoy income can once again be collected by that power.
    PROBABLE EXTRA: The original concept of Convoy Routes reflected the assumption that, in order to collect income from a convoy, players not only needed to have an operational convoy, they also needed to control a designated Port of Departure and a designated Port of Arrival. That’s definitely an interesting idea, because it means that convoys could be neutralized “from the land” rather than just “from the sea”, but once again it introduces a lot of complications which are not strictly necessary to make the core system work. So I think that we should save this concept for an optional extra. Ditto for the idea that some convoy routes can be taken over by another power under certain circumstances.

    COMMENT: Notwithstanding the fact that the whole “Port of Departure and Port of Arrival” model has been reclassified as an optional extra, I realized that we do need to introduce the minimal condition that a player must control at least one coastline to collect convoy income because it would be absurd if that condition didn’t exist (even though there’s not much chance that any power could end up controlling no coastal territories).

    Nice methodical work Marc,
    And also we all agree to focus on a 1941 application first, this will provide a real context for Convoy Rules.
    From what Black_Elk described as possible adjustment for first round Axis Convoy set-up, I think it gives enough versatility.

    So, we can agree upon a 2 IPCs NatCM for all systems from 1941 to G40. Much simpler to keep such convention in all games.

    If disrupted we flip to 0 IPC, it cost 1 IPC to flip it up right and being functional.

    Another aspect, which showed up at least once, is do we use the Convoy Destruction option? This means that on specific condition, NCM is more than just flip (we could put an enemy control marker above the other NCM)
    and need at least 2 IPCs+ 1 IPC to get off the enemy’s NCM and flip NCM to upward position, IMO (to be discuss).
    I think it should be 3 IPCs total.

    So this make 3 stages:
    1- 2 IPCs reward flip upright /
    2- flip downward 0 IPC, cost 1 IPC to repair
    3- flip downward with enemy marker above cost (1+2) 3 IPCs to regain a functional Convoy.

    Another point is about neutralizing Convoy by controling either port (Departure or Arrival).
    Marc, you suggested that once the owner of a Convoy SeaPort regain control of the TT, all Convoy reward apply.
    I believe this should be played differently.
    If an enemy take control of a Seaport TT, you put grey chip upon the NCM in SZ.

    On his collect income phase, if the owner regain control of Seaport, then you toss aside the grey chip and reveal the NCM in their current situation (flip one side or the other.) But you cannot collect any IPC Convoy income.

    Also, if during the combat phase a Convoy SZ is disrupted at the same time the corresponding Seaport is conquered, the damage are applied accordingly then you put grey chip above the owner’s NCM (or both owner’s NCM and enemy’s NCM, if we choose to play Convoy Destruction also).

    That way, controlling and protecting Seaport TT will be more important.
    Exchanging such TT each game round will prevent the owner of collecting income from SZ Convoy.
    I can rationalize this as if the enemy is destroying goods from Convoy just arriving in the seaport.
    The merchant’s ships stay untouched (in the actual state they were) but the owner get no IPC from Convoy.

    I think this change is necessary to increase the reward of keeping the seaport and it will be easier to affect enemy’s economy by fighting over the seaport every game round.

    That’s two major points, I have no time to go further away but I think these two things should be discuss and decided upon.

    Thanks again guys for your great ideas and work.


    About giving no specific Sea-port, but only requiring a TT bordered by a SZ access.
    It seems that on 1941 game map, only Russia could be restricted by such rule (and there is still the Black Sea accessible from Stalingrad/Caucasus), so maybe the core rule should be without any land blocking Convoy Income bonus.
    So, only Submarine disruption would be part of the Core rule.
    Land blocking of Sea-port would apply in 1942.2.

    We can say that Convoy IPCs for Russia can travel from North , from Med Sea to Black Sea, from Indian Ocean to Persia and to Russia by land, from India by land, or from Soviet Far East. We can also invent an Arctic Convoy through Siberia.
    My intent here was just to show how many ways the Russian Convoy Income can still be plausible. So no need to add this requirement in the core rule.

    However, I agree that blocking Seaport still make good incentive in 1941 to invade 0 IPC land territory such as Soviet Far East to prevent Russia from getting any Pacific Convoy bonus.

    Do you think that Controlling an Island group in a Convoy SZ to neutralize it can be part of the core rule?

    6. OPTION: Island Base Convoy Disruption
    Since the possession of Islands, especially in Pacific Theatre of Operation, was very important to built an airfield and be able to disrupt and destroy merchants convoys passing nearby, here is this variant:

    All the Islands in a given Convoy SZ must be captured to be able to proceed to Island Base Convoy Disruption.
    So, this imply that where there is two Islands groups in the SZ, both Islands must be owned to make an Island Base Convoy Disruption.

    At the beginning of the combat phase, if such Islands groups is owned from the start of the player’s turn and the enemy’s Convoy in the SZ is still functional, then the owning player must say that it “does Convoy Disruption via Island Base” and flip all NCM tokens in the surrounding SZ face down. (Everything else after that apply as if it was a Convoy Disruption made by Submarine [or Battleship].)

    As long as the player owned such Islands group at the beginning of his turn, he can do Island Base Convoy Disruption during his Combat phase.

    This imply that as long as such Islands group is contested and exchange back and forth, Island Base Convoy Disruption cannot be performed.
    Rationalization: it take some times to built an effective disruptive operation from Island, things in a just conquered territory must be set up.
    Hence, Disruption from Islands bases cannot be performed right away after Combat resolution.


  • 2017 2016

    @Baron:

    There is 6 Convoys zones for Axis (gaining 22 IPCs) and 6 Convoys zones for Allies (2 zones for each Allied: 22 IPCs) which are active at the start of the game.
    And there is one last South Pacific Convoy Zone (4 IPCs) for United Kingdom which is not activated at the beginning.
    Guadacanal needs to be conquered if Allies wants to get this additional zone.

    Do you think UK player should get an additional active Convoy Zone in Indian Ocean SZ 34 near Persia (oil and Allies shipping) or Saudi Arabia?

    AXIS 1942.2 CONVOY SEA ZONES:

    GERMANY for 10 IPCs / 41 IPCs = 25%
    Norway Convoy Route in SZ 6 near Norway : at 2 IPCs?

    Seaport of arrival:
    Germany: Kiel

    Seaport of departure:
    Norway: Oslo

    Finland-Sweden Convoy Route in SZ 5 in Baltic Sea : at 4 IPCs?

    Seaport of arrival:
    Germany: Kiel

    Seaport of departure:
    Norway: Stockholm

    Mediterranean Convoy Route in SZ 15 in Med Sea : at 4 IPCs?

    Seaport of arrival:
    Italy: Roma

    Seaport of departure:
    Libya: Tripoli


    JAPAN for 12 IPCs / 30 IPCs = 40%

    Japanese Rising Sun Convoy route in SZ 60 for a 4 IPCs?
    Seaport of arrival:
    Japanese: Tokyo

    Seaport of departure:
    Kiangsu: Shanghai

    Japanese South-East Asian Convoy Route in SZ 36 for 4 IPCs?
    Seaport of arrival:
    Japanese: Tokyo

    Seaport of departure: Malaya: Singapor

    Japanese Central Pacific Convoy Route in SZ 50 for 4 IPCs?
    Seaport of arrival:
    Japanese: Tokyo

    Seaport of departure:
    Philippines: Manila

    Caroline Islands need to be owned by Japan to keep Convoy SZ 50 activated.


    ALLIES 1942.2 CONVOY SEA ZONES:

    RUSSIA for 6 IPCs / 24 IPCs = 25 %
    What do you think of this Arctic Convoy route in SZ 3 at 2 IPCs?

    Seaports of arrival:
    Karelia SSR: Murmansk
    Archangel: Archangelsk

    Seaport of departure:
    UK: Liverpool (London)

    Allies must Control Iceland within SZ 3 to be an Active Convoy.

    North Pacific Convoy route in SZ 57 : 4 IPCs?

    Seaports of arrival:
    Soviet Far East: Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky,
    Buryatia SSR: Vladivostok.

    Seaport of departure:
    Western USA: Los Angeles

    Allies must Control Midway Island to be an active Convoy.

    Does a 4 IPCs Russian Convoy SZ in Midway SZ 57 could be appropriate for such Pacific Convoy route?


    USA for 8 IPCs / 42 IPCs = 19%

    Asian-Pacific Convoy Route in SZ 53: at 4 IPCs?

    Seaport of arrival:
    Western USA: San Francisco

    Seaport of departure:
    Eastern Australia: Sydney
    India: Bombay

    Allies must Control Hawaiian Islands to be an active Convoy.

    Does a 4 IPCs USA active (at start) Convoy SZ in Hawaiian SZ 53 could be appropriate for such Asian-Pacific Convoy route ?

    South-Atlantic/Mid-Atlantic Convoy Route in SZ 12: at 4 IPCs?

    Seaport of arrival:
    Eastern USA: Washington

    Seaport of departure:
    Brazil

    Does a 4 IPCs USA active (at start) Convoy SZ 12 in mid-Atlantic SZ could be appropriate for such Convoy route ?


    UNITED KINGDOM for 8 IPCs / 31 = 26% + 4 IPCs    12 IPCs /31 IPCs = 39%

    About a South Pacific Convoy route in SZ 44: at 4 IPCs?

    Seaport of arrival:
    Eastern Australia: Sydney

    Seaport of departure:
    Western USA: San Francisco

    Allies must Control Guadalcanal Island to be an active Convoy.

    Does a 4 IPCs UK’s inactive (at start) Convoy SZ in Guadalcanal SZ 44 could be appropriate for such South Pacific Convoy route ?

    North-Atlantic Convoy Route in SZ 2: at 4 IPCs?

    Seaport of arrival:
    UK: London (Liverpool)

    Seaport of departure:
    Eastern Canada: Halifax / Sydney Cape-Britain

    A 4 IPCs UK active Convoy SZ in North-Atlantic SZ 2 seems to be appropriate for such Convoy route. Don’t you think?

    South Atlantic Convoy Route from Africa in SZ 13 near Gibraltar or SZ 21 : at 4 IPCs?

    Seaport of arrival:
    UK: London (Liverpool)

    Seaport of departure:
    Union of South Africa: Cape Town
    A 4 IPCs UK active Convoy SZ in African-Mid-Atlantic SZ 13 or SZ 21 seems to be appropriate for such Convoy route. Don’t you think?

    I quoted these possible Seaports of arrival and departure for 1942.2 to introduced specific rules for this option:
    A special token for Seaport of arrival is needed.

    CAPTURING SEAPORT OF DEPARTURE:
    When a Seaport of departure is captured by enemy’s unit, all National Convoy Markers in corresponding Convoy SZ must be covered by this enemy control markers.
    All NCMs stay as they were, face up or down, (unless enemy’s units were also performing Disruption during this combat phase).
    But once it is done, it is not possible to perform any Disruption on Convoys covered by enemy’s Control Markers.
    It is neither possible to pay 1 IPC to flip an NCM in upright position.

    As long as these control markers are on the NCMs, the original owner of the seaport of arrival cannot collect Convoy Income.

    When the Seaport of departure is liberated, then all enemy’s Control Markers are taken off.

    CAPTURING SEAPORT OF ARRIVAL:
    When a Seaport of arrival is captured by enemy’s unit, an enemy Control Marker must also be put on the Seaport token of this Territory.
    As long as this Seaport and the territory is not liberated, the Power cannot collect the corresponding Convoy IPCs Income.
    So, even exchanging this territory is enough to get Convoy IPCs during the Collect Income phase of the original owning Power.
    This imply that to prevent the original owner to get Convoy IPCs, the enemy must hold this territory for the duration of a whole turn of the original owner.

    If there is two possible Seaports of arrival, then both Territories must be captured and keep for the whole turn of the original power.
    For example, any of Karelia or Archangel mustn’t be liberated by Russia, if Germany want to prevent Russia from getting IPCs Convoy.
    USSR Seaports of arrival for the North Sea shipping line:
    Karelia SSR: Murmansk
    Archangel: Archangelsk

    This will rise the stake for Russia to fight for any of these two territories.

    All NCMs in corresponding Convoy SZ are not affected and stay in the same status.
    They can be disrupted, or payed for rebuilding during the owner Purchase and repair phase and be flipped upward during owner’s Collect Income Phase.


  • 2017 2016

    I got a hand on Imperious Leader AA50 map.
    So I revised my previous post to include also the most probable SZ numbers to AA50 game.

    @Baron:

    [My preferred choices are [b]bolded.]

    AA50
    GERMANY (AA50 Baltic SZ 5)

    SZ 5 (Baltic Sea SZ)
    SZ 6 (North Sea SZ)
    SZ 13 (West Med Sea SZ)

    ITALY (AA50, MED SZ 14)
    SZ 14 (Central Med Sea SZ)


    ATLANTIC RUSSIA (AA50 SZ 4 : Karelia and Archangel)
    [My preferred choices are bolded.]

    AA50
    SZ 2 (Iceland and Greenland SZ)
    SZ 3 (Northern Norway SZ)
    SZ 4 (Coastal SZ of both Karelia S.S.R. and Archangel)


    UNITED STATES of AMERICA
    East Coast (AA50 SZ10)

    AA50
    SZ 18 (Brazil SZ)
    SZ 19 (Caribbean SZ, West Indies Island 1 IPC)
    SZ 11 (Mid-Atlantic Azores SZ, between East Cost SZ and Gibraltar SZ)


    UNITED KINGDOM
    (AA50 : SZ 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 )

    AA50
    SZ 8 (Northern Mid-Atlantic SZ)
    SZ 9 (Eastern Canada, Halifax SZ)
    SZ 2 (Greenland, Iceland SZ) [As an IC’s production SZ, it is a little less interesting.]
    SZ 12 (Gibraltar Atlantic SZ)
    SZ 17 (French West Africa SZ)
    SZ 15 (Egypt & Trans-Jordan SZ)

    @Baron:

    Trying to build a Core rule with 1941 basic map and expanding with further game.
    Here is what I get.
    I voluntarily not use the Japan SZ, because I don’t think it is relevant to place Convoy in IC’s SZ.

    I would prefer to use SZ which also have an Island Group in it (to more easily add the option of neutralizing Convoy by controlling Islands)

    Interesting SZs (IMO) for Convoys AA50

    JAPAN  (AA50 Japan SZ 62)

    AA50
    SZ 61 (Coastal China SZ, Formosa 1 IPC TT SZ)
    SZ 60 (Okinawa SZ, 1 IPC TT)
    SZ 50 (Philippine Islands SZ, US original set-up TT)
    SZ 51 (Caroline Islands SZ)
    SZ 36 (French Indo-China Thailand Eastern SZ, Hainan Island on map but not a TT)


    PACIFIC RUSSIA (AA50 SZ 62, Buryatia SSR shared with Japan)

    AA50
    SZ 57 (Midway SZ)
    SZ 63 (Coastal SZ of both Soviet Far East and Buryatia S.S.R.)
    SZ 64 (Alaska SZ, Bering Strait SZ)


    UNITED KINGDOM

    AA50
    (INDIA ICs SZ 35 & AUSTRALIA SZ 39, SZ 40, SZ 41 & SZ 47 )
    SZ 28 (French Madagascar, near Union of South Africa SZ)
    SZ 34 (Persia, Trans-Jordan, Egypt, Italian East Africa & Anglo-Egypt Sudan SZ)
    SZ 35 (India SZ, Ceylon Island on map but not a TT)
    SZ 48 (New Guinea SZ) [A less interesting choice for Convoy SZ, since it is less in line with US shipping line.]
    SZ 46 (Solomon Islands SZ) [OOB UK TT]


    UNITED STATES of AMERICA
    West Coast (AA50 SZ 56)

    AA50
    SZ 52 (Wake Island SZ, 0 IPC TT)
    SZ 53 (Hawaiian Islands SZ, 1 IPC TT)


  • 2017 2016

    @Black_Elk, I revised in this actual post my older one above. I wasn’t very satisfy myself about the optional rule for Seaport and I believe it was also your opinion (since there was no +1 above, as it seems to be a casual code to express your agreement.)
    @Baron:

    AXIS 1942.2 possible CONVOY SEA ZONES:

    GERMANY 10 IPCs / 41 IPCs = 25%
    Norway Convoy Route in SZ 6 near Norway
    Seaport of arrival:
    Germany: Kiel
    Seaport of departure:
    Norway: Oslo

    Finland-Sweden Convoy Route in SZ 5 in Baltic Sea
    Seaport of arrival:
    Germany: Kiel
    Seaport of departure:
    Norway: Stockholm

    Central Mediterranean Convoy Route in SZ 15 in Med Sea
    Seaport of arrival:
    Italy: Roma
    Seaport of departure:
    Libya: Tripoli

    Western Mediterranean Convoy Route in SZ 14 in Med Sea
    Seaport of arrival:
    France: Marseilles
    Seaport of departure:
    Libya: Tripoli


    JAPAN 12 IPCs / 30 IPCs = 40%
    Japanese Chinese Sea Convoy route in SZ 61 (Coastal China SZ,Formosa 0 IPC TT on map SZ)
    Seaport of arrival:
    Japan: Tokyo
    Seaport of departure:
    Kiangsu: Shanghai

    Japanese Convoy route in SZ 48: Philippines Islands
    Seaport of arrival:
    Japan: Tokyo
    Seaport of departure:
    Philippines Islands: Manila

    Japanese South-East Asian Convoy Route in SZ 36
    Seaport of arrival:
    Japan: Tokyo
    Seaport of departure: Malaya: Singapor or East Indies? or Borneo?

    Caroline Islands Convoy SZ 50.
    Seaport of departure:
    Japan: Tokyo
    Seaport of arrival:
    Caroline Islands: Truk Island


    ALLIES 1942.2 CONVOY SEA ZONES:

    RUSSIA 6 IPCs / 24 IPCs = 25 %
    What do you think of this Arctic Convoy route in SZ 3

    Seaports of arrival:
    Karelia SSR: Murmansk
    Archangel: Archangelsk

    Seaport of departure:
    UK: Liverpool (London) and Eastern USA: New York

    North Pacific Convoy route in SZ 57: Midway Island
    Seaports of arrival:
    Soviet Far East: Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky,
    Buryatia SSR: Vladivostok.

    Seaport of departure:
    Western USA: Los Angeles


    USA 8 IPCs / 42 IPCs = 19%

    Asian-Pacific Convoy Route in SZ 52 (Wake Island) or SZ 53 (Hawaiian Island)
    Seaport of arrival:
    Western USA: San Francisco
    Seaport of departure:
    Eastern Australia: Sydney and/or
    India: Bombay

    Caribbean Convoy Route in SZ 18
    Seaport of arrival:
    Eastern USA: Washington
    Seaport of departure:
    Brazil


    UNITED KINGDOM 8 IPCs / 31 = 26% +  4 IPCs    12 IPCs /31 IPCs = 39%

    South Pacific Convoy route in SZ 44
    Seaport of arrival:
    Eastern Australia: Sydney
    Seaport of departure:
    Western USA: San Francisco

    North-Atlantic Convoy Route in SZ 2
    Seaport of arrival:
    UK: London (Liverpool)
    Seaport of departure:
    Eastern Canada: Halifax / Sydney Cape-Britain

    South Atlantic Convoy Route from Africa in SZ 13 near Gibraltar or SZ 23 near West Africa
    Seaport of arrival:
    UK: London (Liverpool)
    Seaport of departure:
    Union of South Africa: Cape Town

    I quoted these possible Seaports of arrival and departure for 1942.2 to introduced these less complex optional rule for Seaport:

    In summary, treat the corresponding Convoy SZ as a territorial extension of both Seaport of Departure and Arrival.
    Once one of the territory is captured, a Control marker is put in the territory and also on every Convoy NCMs in the corresponding SZ. This enemy’s control marker in SZ is removed when the seaport territory is liberated, the same way as the enemy’s territorial control marker is removed from the territory.

    CAPTURING SEAPORT OF DEPARTURE:
    When a Seaport of departure is captured by enemy’s unit, all National Convoy Markers in corresponding Convoy SZ must be covered by this enemy control markers, in the same phase an enemy’s Control Marker is put in the Seaport Territory.
    All NCMs stay as they were, face up or down, (unless enemy’s units were also performing Disruption during the previous combat phase of the turn).
    But once it is done, it is not possible to perform any Disruption on Convoys covered by enemy’s Control Markers.
    It is neither possible to flip an NCM in upright position (even if the 1 IPC fee was payed at the beginning of the turn).
    If this situation occurred because a Seaport was not liberated and there is still enemy’s Control Markers on top of Convoy NCMs, then the 1 IPC is returned to the player. (As any unit which cannot be place on board, due to lack of IC’s production capacities, for example.)

    As long as these control markers are on the NCMs, the original owner of the seaport of arrival cannot collect Convoy Income.

    When the Seaport of departure is liberated, then all enemy’s Control Markers are taken off.

    CAPTURING SEAPORT OF ARRIVAL (same procedure as for Seaport of departure):
    When a Seaport of arrival is captured by enemy’s unit, an enemy Control Marker is put on the corresponding Convoy NCM in the Sea Zone.
    As long as this Seaport and the territory is not liberated, the original owner cannot collect the corresponding Convoy IPCs Income.
    As long as these control markers are on the NCMs, the original owner of the seaport of arrival cannot collect Convoy Income.
    When the Seaport of arrival is liberated, then all enemy’s Control Markers in the corresponding Convoy SZ are taken off.

    So, even exchanging this territory is enough to get Convoy IPCs during the Collect Income phase of the original owning Power. As long as there is some NCMs which are already face upright (when taking off the enemy’s control markers over them).
    This imply that to prevent the original owner to get Convoy IPCs, the enemy must hold this territory for the duration of a whole turn of the original owner.
    (Or having made a convoy disruption while conquering the Seaport. In that case, the NCMs must be payed 1 IPC to be flip in upright position if the original owner is able to liberate the seaport. But their will be no IPC to collect until the original owner’s next turn.)

    If there is two possible Seaports of arrival, then both Territories must be captured and keep for the whole turn of the original power.

    For example, any of Karelia or Archangel must not be liberated by Allies, if Germany want to prevent Russia from getting IPCs Convoy.
    USSR Seaports of arrival for the North Sea shipping line:
    Karelia SSR: Murmansk
    Archangel: Archangelsk

    This will rise the stake for Russia to fight for any of these two territories.

    All NCMs in corresponding Convoy SZ cannot be affected when any enemy’s control markers are put on top of them and must stay in the same status.
    They can be payed for rebuild during the owner Purchase and repair phase and be flipped upward during owner’s Collect Income Phase (as long as there is no more enemy’s control markers upon them in the Collect Income Phase, hence the seaport of arrival have been liberated in the previous combat resolution phase).


  • 2017 2016

    @Baron:

    7. A convoy which has been Disrupted becomes Operational when…

    I thought that we were pretty close on an agreement that the owner should pay 1 IPC to flip NCM face upward when it is his Collect Income phase? It was simpler than anything else, even moving DD in convoy SZ to flip upward NCM.

    Did you have something else in mind?

    I just believe that 1 IPC cost can represent everything from cargo lost and ship wreckage.
    I see it as a partial damage to convoy made by Sub, not a total destruction.
    If all ships and their load (of 2 IPCs) would have been lost, the replacement cost would probably be greater than total income which could be made in a single travel (2 IPCs).

    About the Raiding/Disrupting mechanism, there is many methods on the table, any preference Black_Elk?

    METHOD #1
    (All warships and planes can be involved. Convoy can be disrupted during Naval Combat but not after.)

    Any 1 Submarine or Battleship raiding a Convoy Zone: auto destroy of 1 NCM 2 IPCs.*
    OPTIONAL 1: Each pair of any other kind of warships can raid 1 NCM by passing through an unguarded Convoy SZ.
    OPTIONAL 2: Each pair of any planes can raid 1 NCM by attacking an unguarded Convoy SZ.
    In the last options, besides submarine and battleship, any combination of 2 units would flip 1 NCM: 2 surface warships, 2 planes or 1 warship and 1 plane.

    When there is warships defending the Convoy SZ,
    except for Battleship and Submarine, other kind of attacking surface warships and planes makes regular combat BUT all Convoys are safe.
    So any one can use a Destroyer blocker to protect the Convoy SZ.

    When Battleships or Submarines are part of the battle, the attacker can choose to assign a Submarine’s or Battleship’s hit to the Convoy, instead of an enemy warship (or plane) unit chosen by the owner’s (as OOB combat rule for casualty).
    No need to specify before the rolls, it must be specified when the number of successful hits from Subs and BBs are known.

    This simply means that with Submarines or Battleships, as long as they aren’t sunk by defenders units, the attacker can destroy enemy units AND 1 NCM Convoy per combat round per Sub or per Battleship.
    As soon as the regular combat is over, all upright Convoy NCMs are considered having been saved from disruption.

    In this case, the Convoy is played as an additional free hit for the defender (like these puts on Carrier or Battleship) without loosing a combat unit.

    RATIONALIZATION for METHOD #1: It has more details, but it allows real Atlantic Battle depiction in which Destroyers were attacking submarines while submarines were primarily targeting merchant’s ships before their escorting corvettes and Destroyers.

    Also, Submarines and Battleships are treated differently and have an advantage over other warships and planes.
    Especially, Strategic bombers are not quite effective compared to what they can do against Industrial Complex.
    2 StBs (24 IPCs) makes 3 IPCs Convoy damage while 2 StBs can do 3.5 IPCs each for 7 IPCs on average, max 12 IPCs (D6, 1942.2).
    Or 5.5 IPCs each (D6+2, G40) for 11 IPCs on average, max. 16 IPCs.
    1 single submarine at 6 IPCs can do the same job against 1 Convoy.

    METHOD #2:
    (No plane, no surface warship involved. Convoy can only be disrupted after Naval Combat.)

    Any 1 Submarine raiding a Convoy Zone: auto destroy of 1 NCM 2 IPCs.*
    OPTIONAL 1: Battleship can also raid Convoy as a Submarine does.

    When there are warships defending the Convoy SZ, a regular battle is resolve.
    Any attacking surviving Submarine (or Battleship) can apply damage to Convoy NCM (as if there was no previous naval combat).

    OPTIONAL 2 (former METHOD #3): all warships involved
    All warships can raid Convoy as a Submarine does.

    For each surface warship or Submarine passing through Convoy SZ, 1 NCM is flip face down: auto destroy of 1 NCM* 2 IPCs.
    If there are any escorting warships, there is a battle first.
    If the attacking enemy’s units win, each warship can flip down 1 NCM (as if there was no previous naval combat).

    Method #3 is inspired by:
    @Black_Elk:

    Well, the simplest and most familiar method would be to just say these convoys work exactly like the convoys of the Original A&A Europe game (1999.)

    In that case, there was no specialized “convoy attack” or “convoy defense.” It wasn’t a combat per se, so much as a combat movement. In that game, if a convoy zone was defenseless (no protecting warships) then all the raider had to do was enter/pass through the zone to deny their opponent the cash. If their opponent left a ship in the zone to defend the convoy, then this ship had to be destroyed first, and any attacking warship that survived the engagement would then occupy the sz denying the cash to the opponent.
    That’s the most basic National Convoy system I can think of. Of course, we could try to improve on it with additional elements, but if you wanted to keep things as simple as possible, it might be worth just using those rules as the base.

    The whole point of creating a convoy system to begin with, in my view, is to attach IPC values directly to the Sea Zones in some way. Clearly this is an abstraction, even in real world terms. We’re not talking about fishermen pulling fish out of the sea, but rather the idea of a “Trade”, or National exchange, the concept that the same resources/goods can accrue in value, if you’re able to move them farther afield. In my suggested example, that’s what the +3 ipcs +2 IPCs would represent, a bonus to the nation’s normal national production when it’s able to move across the sea.

    In that respect I still think it is more fruitful to conceive of the convoy as a “shipping lane” rather than the actual ships/goods travelling along it. If you control the lane, it is possible to move the resources to a place where they have more value. If the lane is being contested, then you will lose that value (or at least some of that value), because now the logistics cost involved in defending/moving the goods will necessarily increase.

    Keeping the broader gameplay in mind, the advantage of having convoys, is to encourage the purchase of more naval units. Just having more money in play (which the convoys would introduce) helps to facilitate this, but players are even more likely to buy ships, if that additional income is directly attached to a SZ rather than exclusively to land territories, as it is OOB, because then you need ships to disrupt it.

    At every point along the way, you have to make a compromise. A&A is just too simplistic to model everything. It might be entirely conceivable for aircraft to sink a convoy vessel in the real world, and this surely happened in the war, but it’s worth considering whether the game really needs to model this? In A&A Europe (1999) it was not possible for Aircraft to disrupt convoy income, you had to have a ship. Not to suggest that we can’t improve on this, and somehow involve Air in the convoy disruption/defense, but just pointing out that it’s not strictly necessary.


  • 2017 2016

    @ Black_Elk,
    As soon as your are less busy, let me know what you think about the different points.
    I made what I can do by myself without other opinion thus far.
    But, before wrapping up this Convoy Disruption House Rule somehow, I would need some guidance.
    You seems less enthusiast about the Seaport optional rules.
    Should we let it aside or keep it?

    Here is the simpler I can get about it:
    @Baron:

    @Black_Elk, I revised in this actual post my older one above. I wasn’t very satisfy myself about the optional rule for Seaport and I believe it was also your opinion (since there was no +1 above, as it seems to be a casual code to express your agreement.)

    […]

    I quoted these possible Seaports of arrival and departure for 1942.2 to introduced these less complex optional rule for Seaport:

    In summary, treat the corresponding Convoy SZ as a territorial extension of both Seaport of Departure and Arrival.
    Once one of the territory is captured, a Control marker is put in the territory and also on every Convoy NCMs in the corresponding SZ. This enemy’s control marker in SZ is removed when the seaport territory is liberated, the same way as the enemy’s territorial control marker is removed from the territory.

    CAPTURING SEAPORT OF DEPARTURE:
    When a Seaport of departure is captured by enemy’s unit, all National Convoy Markers in corresponding Convoy SZ must be covered by this enemy control markers, in the same phase an enemy’s Control Marker is put in the Seaport Territory.
    All NCMs stay as they were, face up or down, (unless enemy’s units were also performing Disruption during the previous combat phase of the turn).
    But once it is done, it is not possible to perform any Disruption on Convoys covered by enemy’s Control Markers.
    It is neither possible to flip an NCM in upright position (even if the 1 IPC fee was payed at the beginning of the turn).
    If this situation occurred because a Seaport was not liberated and there is still enemy’s Control Markers on top of Convoy NCMs, then the 1 IPC is returned to the player. (As any unit which cannot be place on board, due to lack of IC’s production capacities, for example.)

    As long as these control markers are on the NCMs, the original owner of the seaport of arrival cannot collect Convoy Income.

    When the Seaport of departure is liberated, then all enemy’s Control Markers are taken off.

    CAPTURING SEAPORT OF ARRIVAL (same procedure as for Seaport of departure):
    When a Seaport of arrival is captured by enemy’s unit, an enemy Control Marker is put on the corresponding Convoy NCM in the Sea Zone.
    As long as this Seaport and the territory is not liberated, the original owner cannot collect the corresponding Convoy IPCs Income.
    As long as these control markers are on the NCMs, the original owner of the seaport of arrival cannot collect Convoy Income.
    When the Seaport of arrival is liberated, then all enemy’s Control Markers in the corresponding Convoy SZ are taken off.

    So, even exchanging this territory is enough to get Convoy IPCs during the Collect Income phase of the original owning Power. As long as there is some NCMs which are already face upright (when taking off the enemy’s control markers over them).
    This imply that to prevent the original owner to get Convoy IPCs, the enemy must hold this territory for the duration of a whole turn of the original owner.
    (Or having made a convoy disruption while conquering the Seaport. In that case, the NCMs must be payed 1 IPC to be flip in upright position if the original owner is able to liberate the seaport. But their will be no IPC to collect until the original owner’s next turn.)

    If there is two possible Seaports of arrival, then both Territories must be captured and keep for the whole turn of the original power.

    For example, any of Karelia or Archangel must not be liberated by Allies, if Germany want to prevent Russia from getting IPCs Convoy.
    USSR Seaports of arrival for the North Sea shipping line:
    Karelia SSR: Murmansk
    Archangel: Archangelsk

    This will rise the stake for Russia to fight for any of these two territories.

    All NCMs in corresponding Convoy SZ cannot be affected when any enemy’s control markers are put on top of them and must stay in the same status.
    They can be payed for rebuild during the owner Purchase and repair phase and be flipped upward during owner’s Collect Income Phase (as long as there is no more enemy’s control markers upon them in the Collect Income Phase, hence the seaport of arrival have been liberated in the previous combat resolution phase).


  • '14

    My enthusiasm has not abated, just my free time 🙂

    Had to make a roommate change and the busy season at work eating into my A&A schedule. I’m definitely following the posts though


  • 2017 2016

    @Black_Elk:

    My enthusiasm has not abated, just my free time 🙂

    Had to make a roommate change and the busy season at work eating into my A&A schedule. I’m definitely following the posts though

    I totally understand. I’m in a similar situation at work. :?
    So, I guessed right: you were giving me some hints via “karma points” 🙂
    To followed…


  • 2017 2016

    To underline how Convoy Disruption was a significant part of WWII.

    What was the most significant battle in World War 2?
    Mike Hewitt, Very amateur historian
    To add to Carter Moore’s excellent answer, if you wanted translate ‘GDP’ into a single battle, I nominate the Battle of the Atlantic as the one that really won the war.

    I call it a battle, and it certainly felt that way to those fighting in it, but since  it lasted from September 1939 until May 1945 and the battlefield was the whole of the Atlantic Ocean, it was more a war within a war.

    Essentially, the battle’s story is that of the German U-Boat arm attempting to sink enough allied merchant shipping to cut off the lifeline of supply from the US and Canada to the UK and Russia, and the attempts by the British, Canadian and U.S. navies to stop them.

    At the hight of the battle, tonnage of shipping sunk was outpacing tonnage of shipping built, a trend which would, if continued, have meant the eventual end of transatlantic supply. This would quite probably have forced the capitulation of the UK and gravely weakened the Soviet Union (which, although it would never admit it, and still doesn’t, relied heavily on U.S. and British material shipped to it through the Arctic convoys.)

    Fortunately, the allied navies, under new British CIC Western Approaches Max Horton (a great man who commanded submarines himself in WW1), fought back effectively with new weapons and tactics, such as Hedgehog, improved detection equipment and better air cover, so that German submarines found it increasingly difficult to operate.

    If the U-boats had won the Battle of the Atlantic, all the land battles in Europe would have been for nothing as, without supply, neither Britain nor, possibly, the Soviet Union could have continued the fight.

    This is not, of course, to denigrate the very real land and air victories (Stalingrad, The Battle of Britain, El Alamein, Kursk, Overlord) which ultimately defeated Germany - it’s just that the outcome of each might have been very different without the supplies from across the Atlantic.

    http://www.quora.com/What-was-the-most-significant-battle-in-World-War-2


  • '14

    That last post is particularly awesome and makes a very strong case for an Atlantic convoy system in A&A!

    As for the methods suggested, I gravitate towards the simplest workable method, at least for a game like 1942.2. My concern with the more involved methods, is that would be a bit too rules intensive for most people in my playgroup. I totally appreciate the desire to have a system that balances for units other than subs, I just worry that it would be tough to teach.

    In this case my preference would be for something like Marc suggested, where the more expansive methods build on the baseline method. For example, where method 2 or 3 build on method 1, rather than replacing it. If that makes sense.

    As always excellent analyses Baron!


  • 2017 2016

    @Black_Elk:

    That last post is particularly awesome and makes a very strong case for an Atlantic convoy system in A&A!

    As for the methods suggested, I gravitate towards the simplest workable method, at least for a game like 1942.2. My concern with the more involved methods, is that would be a bit too rules intensive for most people in my playgroup. I totally appreciate the desire to have a system that balances for units other than subs, I just worry that it would be tough to teach.

    In this case my preference would be for something like Marc suggested, where the more expansive methods build on the baseline method. For example, where method 2 or 3 build on method 1, rather than replacing it. If that makes sense. As always excellent analyses Baron!

    I thought about all this and I believe it is mandatory to come forward with something a little more valuable to have more incentive to risk costly warships into ocean for so minor objective, such as a few NCMs and IPCs from Convoy Disruption.

    METHOD #3, is boosted but still simpler than Method #1 with either option 1 or 2:

    METHOD #3
    (All warships and planes can be involved. Convoy can be disrupted after Naval Combat.)

    Any 1 Submarine or Battleship disrupting a Convoy Zone: auto destroy of 2 NCMs 2 IPCs per Convoy SZ.*
    To disrupt a Convoy SZ, Submarine or Battleship can do it from
    A) a starting Convoy SZ or
    B) moving through a Convoy SZ or
    C) ending a Combat Move in a Convoy SZ.

    For example, a given Submarine could be able to disrupt up to 6 NCMs in a single Combat Move, if for example SZ 1, SZ 2 and SZ3 were enemy’s Convoy SZ (with 3 NCMs in each Convoy SZ) and the Submarine was starting from SZ3 to SZ1 via SZ2, then up to 2 NCMs per SZ would be flip face down.

    OPTION 1: Any other kind of warships can raid 1 NCM by starting from, passing through or ending into an unguarded Convoy SZ.
    So, each Destroyer, Cruiser or Carrier can flip face down up to 3 NCMs from three different Convoy SZs.

    OPTION 2: Any bomber (StB or TcB) can raid a single 1 NCM by attacking an unguarded Convoy SZ.
    In the last option, only 1 specific Convoy SZ can be targeted by one single bomber.
    Many bombers can target different Convoy SZs or the same SZ to disrupt additional NCMs in the SZ as well.

    When there are warships defending the Convoy SZ, a regular battle is resolve.
    Each attacking surviving Submarine (or Battleship) can apply damage to 2 Convoy NCMs (as if there was no previous naval combat).
    OPTION 1: Any other kind of warships can raid 1 NCM each.
    OPTION 2: Each surviving bomber (TcB or StB) can raid 1 NCM in this Convoy SZ.


  • 2017 2016

    @Argothair:

    My personal design philosophy is that when you scale back the map, you also have to scale back the complexity of the rules and features. That doesn’t mean you can’t have convoys, airbases, etc., but it might mean that you have to find a way to make them smaller or less intrusive.

    For example, having dozens of convoy zones makes sense in G40, because even the smaller factions start out with dozens of IPCs per turn – even if you lose, e.g., 4 IPCs to submarine raids, that’s still only about 10% of your economy. In 1942.2, though, the same submarines could wind up doing a lot more damage – submarines in the western and central Mediterranean alone could wipe out 14 German IPCs, i.e., roughly 30% of the German economy. To fix that, I’d recommend having about two designated ‘convoy zones’ for each nation – if there’s one or more enemy submarines in the convoy zone during your collect income phase, then nothing happens, and if there are no enemy submarines in the convoy zone, you collect, e.g., 2 IPCs per convoy zone. That keeps the rules simpler and prevents the submarine warfare from taking up too much of people’s time and attention.

    Another interesting idea to think about for finding the best Convoy Disruption mechanics.
    Perhaps, this kind of mechanics should be use for 1941 and 1942.2 while a more complex one for G40?


  • 2017 2016

    A slightly different and less unbalancing than the above (but a little more complex move).

    @Black_Elk:

    That last post is particularly awesome and makes a very strong case for an Atlantic convoy system in A&A!

    As for the methods suggested, I gravitate towards the simplest workable method, at least for a game like 1942.2. My concern with the more involved methods, is that would be a bit too rules intensive for most people in my playgroup. I totally appreciate the desire to have a system that balances for units other than subs, I just worry that it would be tough to teach.

    In this case my preference would be for something like Marc suggested, where the more expansive methods build on the baseline method. For example, where method 2 or 3 build on method 1, rather than replacing it. If that makes sense. As always excellent analyses Baron!

    Still mandatory to come forward with something a little more valuable to get a better incentive to risk costly warships into ocean for so minor objective, such as a few NCMs and IPCs from Convoy Disruption. I reduced somehow the possible damage of this Convoy Disruption mechanic.

    This modified METHOD #3, is boosted but still simpler than Method #1 with either option 1 or 2:

    METHOD #3 restricted to 2 SZs
    (All warships and planes can be involved. Convoy can be disrupted after Naval Combat.)

    Any 1 Submarine or Battleship disrupting a Convoy Zone: auto destroy of 2 NCMs 2 IPCs per Convoy SZ.*
    Only 2 SZs can be disrupted and up to 4 NCMs can be flipped face down per Submarine or Battleship.
    To disrupt a Convoy SZ, Submarine or Battleship can do it from
    A) a starting Convoy SZ or
    B) moving through a Convoy SZ or
    C) ending a Combat Move in a Convoy SZ.

    For example, a given Submarine could be able to disrupt up to 4 NCMs in a single Combat Move, if for example SZ1, SZ2 and SZ3 were enemy’s Convoy SZs (with 3 NCMs in each Convoy SZ) and the Submarine was starting from SZ3 to SZ1 via SZ2, then up to 2 NCMs per each SZ would be flip face down.
    BUT, you would have to choose which SZs is disrupted and which one is not.
    This would give 3 combinations of disrupted convoy in 2 SZs (for instance: SZ1 & SZ2 but not SZ3 / SZ1 & SZ3 but not SZ2 / SZ2 & SZ3 but not SZ1).

    OPTION 1: Any other kind of warships can raid 1 NCM by starting from, passing through or ending into an unguarded Convoy SZ.
    So, each Destroyer, Cruiser or Carrier can flip face down up to 2 NCMs from three different Convoy SZs.

    OPTION 2: Any bomber (StB or TcB) can raid a single 1 NCM by attacking an unguarded Convoy SZ.
    In this option, only 1 specific Convoy SZ can be targeted by one single bomber.
    Flying over a SZ doesn’t allow to Disrupt Convoy in it.
    Many bombers can target different Convoy SZs or the same SZ to disrupt additional NCMs in the SZ as well.

    When there are warships defending the Convoy SZ, a regular battle is resolve.
    Each attacking surviving Submarine (or Battleship) can apply damage to 2 Convoy NCMs (as if there was no previous naval combat).
    OPTION 1: Any other kind of warships can raid 1 NCM each.
    OPTION 2: Each surviving bomber (TcB or StB) can raid 1 NCM in this Convoy SZ.

    Usual OOB movement restriction apply, such as Destroyer blocking Submarines.
    So, by blocking a Sub in a given SZ, a DD will prevent any other Convoy Disruption in any further away Convoy SZ.


  • 2017 2016

    This post was first introduced in Black_Elk thread.
    It provides a different workable way of doing SBR for either 1942.2 and AA50.
    It is a punitive mechanics, as OOB G40 instead of a bonus mechanics develop previously on this actual thread.

    It is yet to be play-test to see if this can be balanced somehow.

    It is also provided so anyone can more specifically post comment on this Convoy Disruption mechanics.

    There is still a lot of issues to be able to translate this mechanic and principles into G40.
    Any help is welcome.

    @Baron:

    **@Baron:

    @Baron:

    @regularkid:

    Baron, how bout this for a simplified (closer to OOB) approach, that puts convoy raids on the attackers turn:

    1. Warships and Subs may conduct convoy raids against any income producing territory bordering a convoy zone. This works similar to a shore bombardment, with each participating ship simply targeting a specific territory (No need for a rough division of damage between allied powers bordering the same sz. The attacker simply chooses each ships target).
    **2. Surface ships can only make a raid in an empty convoy zone (if enemy ships are present, a naval battle results. No raid). Submarines can raid any convoy zone, unless enemy destroyer is present (if enemy destroyer is present, a naval battle results. No raid).

    3. Convoy raid damage is determined using the OOB method, with each raid inflicting up to the value of the targeted territory.** The total amount of damage is immediately removed from the targeted player’s treasury.

    4. Each convoy zone can only be raided once per round, per side.

    Sound good?

    At first glance it seems effectively a working alternative to Convoy Disruption nearer OOB mechanic.

    #1doesn’t seem necessary. Once the damage are rolled, you apply the damage accordingly and let the owners split as they wish. The same way casualty are determined by multiple defenders.
    The damage cap would be the sum of all enemy’s adjacent TTs to Convoy SZ.

    It would be easier to implement into Triple A.

    What do you do about Fighter rolling 2D6, keeping 1-3 as damage?
    I’m OK with TcB.
    Any idea about Strategic bombers?
    In OOB Convoy system, every 1D6 roll gives an avg of 1 IPC, 2D6 gives 2 IPCs.
    But getting no damage is possible, and there is no risk to the attacker.

    What about letting StB rolling 1D6 and keeping 1-3 as damage?
    1 IPC avg is much lower than 2.583 IPCs (or 2.916) avg on SBR.

    Even if I try to develop a Convoy system similar to SBR, I believe that to increase action in ATO, there should be minimal danger against raider during his Convoy raiding phase.

    So the OOB method: 1-3 = 1-3 damage 4-6 = 0 damage
    DD, CA, BB roll 1 D6, CV have no dice, TcBs and Fgs get 2D6 along with Subs,
    is my prefered choice. It imply no risk but there is 50% on 1 dice to totally miss.
    That’s fine for me. Combat units must fight Subs to get ride of them.
    Changing this phase into attacker’s turn makes it more efficient.
    The more units are able to survive somehow from combat or raid, the more intense would be this theatre of operation. There will be plenty of units in many SZs.
    That is why I prefer OOB raid, TP being able to escape on 2nd round, DD blocking 1:1 Sub, and only for one round, Sub cannot hit or be hit by submarine, etc.

    Also, I’m actually working on developing Convoy SZs for 1942.2, so only Sub can do convoy damage in a way that it increase the losses for Allies vs Axis but the counter will be 5-6-8-9-12-15 cost structure, which I believe favors 2 Allied powers over 1 Axis power (Japan).

    I will use Convoy rules to reduce UK and US economy, so buying cheaper warships would still be a burden due to IPCs shortage. I have hope this can balance things out.

    Since the cost structure affect warships only, Russia have no Convoy SZ, so its economy cannot suffer from raid.

    Now, I can provide a complete and still simple National Convoy Disruption House rule for 1942.2. IDK if this mechanic can also works with G40.

    First thing, the Convoy SZ is to be identify with owner’s Control Marker.
    All Convoy SZs worth 4 IPCs and are bordering at least 1 TT or have an island group in it.
    These TTs can worth 0 IPC to many IPCs, this doesn’t change the 4 IPCs Convoy SZ basis.

    Here is all 1942.2 Convoy SZs I would implement (some such as SZs 2, 3, 45, 53, 57 can be considered as Allied lend-lease shipping SZs coming from either UK or US toward Russia or Australia) :

    United Kingdom 31 IPCs
    8 SZs x 4 IPCs = 32 IPCs max.
    SZs 3 (Iceland), 7 (Northern UK), 8 (Southern UK),
    SZs 10 (Eastern Canada), 23 (West Africa),
    SZs 34 (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Persia), 35 (India), 45 (North Eastern Australia)

    United States 42 IPCs
    9 SZs x 4 IPCs = 36 IPCs max.
    SZs 2 (Greenland), 11 (US East Coast), 18 (Caribbean), 22 (Brazil),
    SZs 53 (Hawaii), 55 (Mexico West Coast), 56 (US West Coast),
    SZs 57 (Midway), 65 (Alaska/Western Canada)

    Germany 41 IPCs
    2 SZs x 4 IPCs = 8 IPCs max.
    SZ 5 (Baltic)
    SZ 15 (Italy)

    Japan 30 IPCs
    7 SZs x 4 IPCs = 28 IPCs max.
    SZs 36 (Malaya), 37 (East Indies), 47 (Borneo),
    SZs 48 (Philippines), 60 (Japan), 61 (Costal China), 62 (Korea)

    The most important thing to note :
    lf at least 1 territory bordering (or the Island group within) the Convoy SZ is taken from his original owner and the Convoy SZ belong to the same owner, then this Convoy SZ is deactivated and can no longer be raided by enemy’s of the original Convoy SZ owner’s which have his control marker in this Convoy SZ.

    When such Convoy SZ is deactivated, simply flip this Nation Control Marker face downward.

    Only Submarine can raid Convoy SZ.

    During Phase 3: Conduct Combat
    Combat Sequence
    1. Strategic and tactical bombing raids AND/OR Convoy Disruption

    Each Submarine can either make a regular attack (Step 3. General combat) or a Convoy raid (Step 1. S&TBR AND/OR Convoy Disruption).
    Even if there is warships (including DD) in Convoy SZ, Submarine can still make such raid.

    Once the raid is done, Submarine cannot retreat and must stay in raided SZ.

    Each 5 IPCs Submarine can make 1 IPC + 1 to 3 IPCs damage, by rolling 1D6: 1-3 = 1-3 IPCs / 4-6 = 0 damage.
    So a single Sub always does at least 1 IPC damage (50% of the time, and more the other 50%).

    There is no defense roll and Destroyer cannot do anything about it.
    It is up to the Convoy SZ owner’s to send Destroyers (and more) on his turn to sink Subs.

    These damage and odds are for:
    5 IPCs Sub A2 first strike, D1 M2, damage: 1D6 (1-3= 1-3 / 4-6 = 0) +1 IPCs.
    6 IPCs Destroyer A2 D2 M2, cancel 1:1 Sub Submerge and Stealth Move but not first strike.

    If you want to play with OOB Sub and DD, then damage per Sub must be 2 IPCs + 1-3 IPCs.

    The odds must be different because Submarine commander must see some benefits to not attack warships.
    The odds for 5 IPCs Sub is 2/6 x 6 IPCs for DD = 2 IPCs damage on average.
    1 IPC + 1-3 IPCs gives the same 2 IPCs average.

    The odds for OOB 6 IPCs Sub are 2/6 x 8 IPCs DD = 2 2/3 IPCs
    2 IPCs + 1-3 IPCs gives 3 IPCs average but the cap is 4, which gives 2 5/6 IPCs.
    This is pretty close, and OOB Subs are lame ducks on defense vs DDs.

    Damage are immediately remove from Convoy owner’s hands, never more than 4 IPCs per SZ for the whole game round.

    And attacker must put chips under owner’s National Control Marker (1 chip per IPC damage) as a reminder for the game round of how many IPCs were raided if multiple raids occur from more than one alliance powers.

    These chips will be removed from under National Control Marker in SZ during Convoy SZ’s owner 1. Purchase and Repair Units. Step 2: Pay for Units and Repair Damaged Units
    and Facilities.


    National Convoy Disruption House rule for AA50 1941 set up.
    Here is all AA50 Convoy SZs, 1941 set-up I would implement (some such as SZs 2, 3, 46, 53, 57 can be considered as Allied lend-lease shipping SZs coming from either UK or US toward Russia or Australia) :

    United Kingdom 43 IPCs
    8 SZs x 4 IPCs = 32 IPCs max.
    SZs 3 (North East of UK), 8 (Southern UK), 9 (Eastern Canada), 17 (French West Africa),
    SZs 34 (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Persia), 35 (India), 38 (East Indies), 46 (Solomon Islands)

    United States 40 IPCs
    9 SZs x 4 IPCs = 36 IPCs max.
    SZs 2 (Greenland / Northern UK), 10 (US East Coast), 18 (Brazil), 19 (Caribbean),
    SZs 53 (Hawaii), 55 (Mexico West Coast), 56 (US West Coast),
    SZs 57 (Midway), 65 (Alaska/Western Canada)

    Germany 31 IPCs
    1 SZ x 4 IPCs = 4 IPCs max.
    SZ 5 (Baltic)

    Italy 10 IPCs
    1 SZ x 4 IPCs = 4 IPCs max.
    SZ 14 (Italy)

    Japan 17 IPCs
    6 SZs x 4 IPCs = 24 IPCs max.
    SZ 36 (South Malaya), SZ 37 (French Indo-China),
    SZ 49* (Borneo), SZ 50* (Philippines),
    SZ 61 (Coastal China), SZ 62 (Japan)
    Deactivated on set-up.*


  • 2017 2016

    Another possibility to increase realism in AA50 or 1942.2:

    Battleship can also raid Convoy SZ.

    Each Battleship can make a Convoy raid if there is no surface warship in the Convoy SZ.
    Once the raid is done, Battleship cannot retreat and must stay in raided SZ.

    Under SS 5-DD 6-TP 8-CA 9-CV 12-BB 15 cost structure:

    Each 15 IPCs Battleship can make 1 IPC + 1 to 3 IPCs damage, by rolling 1D6: 1-4 = 1-3 IPCs / 5-6 = 0 damage. Still caping at 4 IPCs per Convoy SZ.
    So, 1= 2, 2= 3, 3= 4, 4= 4, 5= 1, 6= 1. Average damage: 15/6 = 2.5 IPCs.
    Damage roll is based on BB attack value @4.

    This damage roll could be apply to an OOB 20 IPCs Battleship too.


    A simpler one can be :
    Each 15 IPCs Battleship can make 1 to 4 IPCs damage, by rolling 1D6: 1-4 = 1-4 IPCs / 5-6 = 0 damage. Still caping at 4 IPCs per Convoy SZ.
    So, 1= 1, 2= 2, 3= 3, 4= 4, 5= 0, 6= 0. Average damage: 10/6 = 1.67 IPCs.

    Damage roll is only based on Battleship attack value @4.



  • Geez…baron, you restart my headache. 😄


  • 2017 2016

    For Global 1940 alternate Convoy Disruption House Rule.

    @Baron:

    @Black_Elk:

    Yes I think that does a pretty good job of sumarizing my misgivings, and contrast with the OOB situation. Also important to me is the ability to create one system that could work on all game boards.
    Frankly I don’t like either system, because I think the economic disruption should be a feature of the submarine unit specifically (not all warships) and that this should be a form of “attack” made during the raiding player’s own “conduct combat phase,” not during the opponent’s collect income phase!
    My argument there would be for simplicity and for gameplay i.e. as a way to make the submarine different from other naval attack units, and give it a more independent “hunting role.” I say the argument is “for the gameplay” because I’m aware that historically any warship could probably disrupt convoys. But what we’re looking for in a rule, is a way to separate off the role of subs and make that role unique or advantageous when compared to other naval units at a comparable cost. More advantageous than they are in normal combat, so players actually have an incentive to use them for the economic attacks instead of just normal attacks!

    Otherwise the subs just default to the same way other naval combat units work e.g. grouped together with the main fleet, or the main air group. I don’t think the submarine should work like this. (I don’t think StratBs should work like this either, for that matter, even if this conversation is just for subs, I see them as related issues. I mean the way a bomber’s economic attack advantage is subordinated to its normal combat attack advantage vs ships, instead of the other way around.)

    The sub unit would be far more interesting, if it’s primary role was for economic attacks, with a secondary role in normal combat. The current situation is basically the reverse. And the sub isn’t really very unique as a convoy disrupting unit. It behaves like all other ships that disrupt convoys, except that its cheaper for the spam and can’t be hit by air without a dd.

    The analogy I always return to is SBR or Rocket Attacks, I think subs should work in a similar way. Either you choose to use them as a combat unit, or you forego combat for the chance at an “economic attack.” I think you should be able to run such a “sub attack” in any coastal sea zone bordering enemy territories with an ipc value, otherwise it only works on maps with a special “marker” or map designation drawn on the sz, which means it can’t work on all game boards.

    A simple rule, that took into account the max value of adjacent enemy territories, and then allowed subs to “roll” against it, would be ideal. If its overpowered, then you just build in some kind of defensive roll, similar to an AAgun vs a bomber, to destroy the sub. I used to play with similar rules in AA50 (although there it was a special roll against coastal factories for my group.)

    The danger of all convoy rules that allow you to “destroy” enemy IPCs directly is how they can affect the first round purchase options. Thinking about SBR as a model, when you “raid” with a bomber in the latest games, money is removed indirectly (via the purchase/repair damage system). In the old SBR rules of Classic/Revised a successful “raid” meant that your opponent had give money to the bank immediately, with no “choice” and no damage/repair. Seems to me that the G40 convoy rules follow the earlier sort of idea of Classic or Revised (where the money is given up to the bank ie. destroyed), even though I much prefer the latter sort of idea from AA50 and later, where the player got to choose how to deal with the consequences of the raid.

    In other words, I don’t think players should have to learn two totally separate “economic raiding mechanics” one for bombers and one for subs. Instead the two mechanics should mirror each other and work in similar ways. If not exactly the same, than at least similar enough that I can explain one with reference to the other.

    Putting the focus on coastal factories would probably be too overpowered, given how SBR already works against these factories. But if you’re not going to put the focus on coastal factories or give the defender an intermediate “repair” type option, but use the old model (money taken goes straight to the bank) then there should at least be a chance that the “raiding” unit can be destroyed during the economic attack, the same way bombers face AA fire, defender rolls at 1 to destroy the unit attempting to raid. I think that would be way easier than separating this whole “convoy” process out across multiple turns in the game round, which is what the current G40 system does.

    I will assume my most preferred type of 5 IPCs Sub against 6 IPCs DD:

    HR SUBMARINE A2 first strike D1 M2 C5 IPCs,
    first strike even when enemy’s DD present, no first strike roll on defense (ever)
    blocked by DD on 1:1 basis Stealth Move and
    on 1:1 basis Sub’s Submerged for first round only.
    Any plane can hit unsubmerged Submarine during combat round without any Destroyer presence.
    (If a Sub submerge during first strike phase, plane can not hit Sub.)
    Submarine cannot hit submarine.

    Convoy Raid Damage: 1 Dice keep all 1 to 3 results AND add 1 IPC

    Immediately remove IPCs from enemy’s power.
    Add 1 Sub’s National Control Marker in SZ Convoy per IPC damage (as reminder).

    DESTROYER A2 D2 M2 C6 IPCs,
    blocks on a 1:1 basis Submarine’s Stealth Move, CM and NCM, and Submerge, first round only.

    I would also delete Bordeaux Convoy SZ 105.

    1. Any Convoy SZ is to be identify with owner’s Control Marker.
      All Convoy SZs worth 4 IPCs and are bordering at least 1 TT or have an island group in it.
      These TTs can worth 0 IPC to many IPCs, this doesn’t change the 4 IPCs Convoy SZ basis.

    Split Convoy Sea Zone:
    lf at least 1 territory bordering the Convoy SZ belong to an enemy’s Power, this Convoy SZ maximum is split in two 2 IPCs which can be both raided by the other side. So, some Convoy SZs could have two National Control Markers, one from Allied Power and one from an Axis power.

    If multiple Powers from the same side share a common Convoy SZ, damages are split between these Powers, as they wish. (Same as multiples casualties in a TT or SZ.)

    During Phase 3: Conduct Combat
    Combat Sequence
    1. Strategic and tactical bombing raids AND/OR Convoy Disruption

    1. During Combat move phase, each Submarine can choose whether to make a regular combat attack (Step 3. General combat)
      OR
      to do Convoy Raid in a given Convoy SZ (Step 1. S&TBR AND/OR Convoy Disruption).
      It is only Submarine units which get this option, even if Convoy SZ is enemy controlled by warships.

    Other warships and aircrafts (Destroyer, Cruiser, Carrier, Battleship) can only do such Convoy Raid if there is no enemy’s surface Warships in Convoy SZ. (Step 1. S&TBR AND/OR Convoy Disruption)

    1. The Convoy Raid damage roll is determined that way: 1 roll 1D6 per Sub and keep only 1 to 3 results, and add 1 IPC to the result.
      (Odds: 2+3+4+1+1+1= 12/6 = avg 2 IPCs.)
      (@2 first strike = up to 3 damage roll)

    It gives the amount of IPCs which will be lost immediately by Convoy SZ’s owner.
    Never more than 4 IPCs per Convoy SZ for the whole game round.

    You put one chip under appropriate Country Control Marker for each IPC damage on Convoy to keep track of the entire game round results against this Power.

    Other Combat units get only 1 single dice to roll, and get Convoy damage if they get their attack number or lower:
    Surface warships:
    Destroyer Attack @2 Damage on 1-2. (odds: 3/6 = avg 0.5 IPC)
    Cruiser Attack @3 Damage on 1-3. (odds: 6/6 = avg 1 IPC)
    Battleship Attack @4 Dmage on 1-4. (odds: 10/6 = avg 1.67 IPC)
    Carrier Attack @0

    Aircrafts:
    All empty Convoy SZs are treated the same as a Tactical Raid target.

    Fighter have no attack on Convoy SZ.

    Tactical Bomber (12 IPCs HouseRuled unit) takes a Tactical Bombing Raid 1D6 damage as usual but must first submit to preemptive AA defense @1.
    (Odds: 1+2+3+4+5 (max:4)+6 (max:4)=18/6= avg dmg result is 3 - 2 = +1 IPC. If regular AA roll)
    (Odds: 18/6x 5/6 = 15/6 = 2.5 - 2 = +0.5 IPC. If preemptive AA roll)
    (OOB G40 TBR D6: +2.917 - 2 = +0.917 IPC damage/TBR)

    Strategic Bomber makes a Tactical Bombing Raid 1D6+2 damage as usual but must first submit to preemptive AA defense @1.
    (Odds 3+4+4+4+4+4=23/6= avg 3.833 -2 = +1.833 IPCs. If regular AA roll is prefered.)
    (Odds 23/6 x 5/6 = 115/36 = 3.194 -2 = +1.194 IPCs If preemptive AA roll is chosen.)
    (OOB G40 SBR D6+2: +4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR)

    (This Convoy Raid by Bombers is played as an IC’s AAA.
    Many Cargo Ships were equipped with AA guns and were more able to defend themselves than against Submarines attack.)
    In addition, the 4 IPCs cap in Convoy SZ makes such Tactical Bombing Raid sub-optimized compared to SBR and TBR on IC, Air Base and Naval Base, as you can compare above.

    **Do you think this can be a workable balance system?

    Do you see it as a sufficient incentive for Submarines Commander to prefer raiding over regular combat?**


  • 2017 2016

    @Baron:

    I prefer TP being able to escape on 2nd round, DD blocking 1:1 Sub, and only for one round, Sub cannot hit or be hit by submarine, etc.

    Also, I have adapted my 1942.2  National Convoy House rule and Convoy SZs for 1941, so only Submarine can do convoy damage in a way that it increase the losses for Allies vs Axis but the counter will be 5-6-8-9-12-15 cost structure, which I believe favors two Allied powers (UK and USA) over 1 Axis power (Japan).

    I will use Convoy rules to reduce UK and US economy, so buying cheaper warships would still be tough on pocket due to IPCs shortage. I have hope this can balance things out to play an interesting 1941 game.

    Since the cost structure affect warships only, Russia have no Convoy SZ, so its economy cannot suffer from raid.

    National Convoy Disruption for 1941 Submarine economic warfare
    First thing, each Convoy SZ is to be identify with owner’s Control Marker.

    All Convoy SZs worth 2 IPCs and are bordering at least 1 TT or have one island group or more islands in it.

    These TTs can worth 0 IPC to many IPCs, this doesn’t change the 2 IPCs Convoy SZ basis for 1941.

    Here is all 1941 Convoy SZs I would implement (some such as SZs 2, 6, 28, 37, 40, 43 can be considered as Allied lend-lease shipping SZs coming from either UK or US toward Russia or Australia) :

    United Kingdom 12 IPCs
    7 SZs x 2 IPCs = 14 IPCs max.
    SZs 6 (Northern UK), 8 (Southern UK), 10 (Eastern Canada),
    SZs 28 (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Persia), 29 (India), 30 (East Indies), 37 (Solomons)

    United States 17 IPCs
    7 SZs x 2 IPCs = 14 IPCs max.
    SZs 2 (Greenland), 11 (US East Coast),
    12 (Caribbean), 22 (Brazil),
    SZs 40 (Hawaii), 42 (US West Coast), 43 (Midway)

    Germany 12 IPCs
    1 SZ x 2 IPCs = 2 IPCs max.
    SZ 5 (Baltic)

    Japan 9 IPCs
    5 SZs x 2 IPCs = 10 IPCs max.
    SZ 31 (Southeast Asia),
    SZs 32* (Borneo),  38* (Philippines),
    SZs 45 (Japan, Manchuria), 46 (Coastal China).
    *Deactivated on set-up.

    The most important thing to note :
    lf at least 1 territory bordering (or Island or an Island group within) the Convoy SZ is taken from his original owner and the Convoy SZ belong to the same owner, then this Convoy SZ is deactivated and can no longer be raided by enemy’s of the original Convoy SZ owner’s which have his control marker in this Convoy SZ.

    When such Convoy SZ is deactivated, simply flip this Nation Control Marker face downward.

    Only Submarine can raid Convoy SZ.

    During Phase 3: Conduct Combat
    Combat Sequence
    1. Strategic and tactical bombing raids AND/OR Convoy Disruption

    Each Submarine can either make a regular attack (Step 3. General combat) or a Convoy raid (Step 1. S&TBR AND/OR Convoy Disruption).
    Even if there is warships (including DD) in Convoy SZ, Submarine can still make such raid.

    Once the raid is done, Submarine cannot retreat and must stay in raided SZ.

    Each 5 IPCs Submarine can make 1 IPC + 0 to 1 IPC damage, by rolling 1D6: 1-3 = 1 IPC / 4-6 = 0 damage.
    So a single Submarine always does at least 1 IPC damage (50% of the time, and 2 IPCs the other 50%).

    There is no defense roll and Destroyer cannot do anything about it.
    It is up to the Convoy SZ owner’s to send Destroyers (and more) on his turn to sink Subs.

    These damage and odds are for:
    5 IPCs Sub A2 first strike, D1 M2, damage: 1D6 (1-3= 1 IPC / 4-6 = 0) +1 IPC.
    6 IPCs Destroyer A2 D2 M2, cancel 1:1 Sub Submerge and Stealth Move but not first strike.

    If you want to play with OOB Sub and DD, then damage per Sub must be 2 IPCs.

    The odds must be different because Submarine commander must see some benefits to not attack warships.
    The odds for 5 IPCs Sub is 2/6 x 6 IPCs for DD = 2 IPCs damage on average.
    1 IPC + 0-1 IPC gives 1.5 IPCs average. (Slightly under average vs Destroyer.)

    The odds for OOB 6 IPCs Sub are 2/6 x 8 IPCs DD = 2 2/3 IPCs
    2 IPCs gives 2 IPCs average but the cap is 2, which gives anyhow 2 PCs.
    This is under average vs OOB Destroyers, and OOB Subs are lame ducks on defense vs DDs, but damage are automatic and there is not that much units in this A&A shorter version.

    Damage are immediately remove from Convoy owner’s hands, never more than 2 IPCs per SZ for the whole game round.

    And attacker must put chips under SZ owner’s Control Marker (1 chip per IPC damage) as a reminder for the game round of how many IPCs were raided if multiple raids occur from more than one alliance powers.

    These chips under owner’s National Control Marker will be removed at no cost from the Convoy SZ during Convoy SZ’s owner 1. Purchase and Repair Units. Step 2: Pay for Units and Repair Damaged Units and Facilities.


    For reference, here is what I meant about 5-6-8-9-12-15 cost structure:

    @Baron:

    @Baron:

    This is the reduced cost structure with near OOB cost for planes and Carrier holding 2 planes (Fgs or TcBs).
    I also stick to this cost structure (5-6-9-12-15).
    I put the 1 hit Transport at 8 IPCs.
    I write here many ideas which still fit into core roster at this low cost.
    All other ground units are as OOB, except for Tank which no longer gives attack bonus to TacB.

    Unit type
    Cost    Combat values
    Special abilities

    SUBMARINE
    5 IPCs A2fs* D1 M2
    Permanent A2 first strike *against all surface vessels only, including DDs.
    Cannot hit Sub or Aircraft
    Submerge and Stealth Move
    On offense, Sub’s commander can allocate each hit whether on transports group or warships group, the owner still choose which individual unit is the casualty.

    On defense, Stealth Move allows (but not compel to) each Sub 1 single roll@1 against any ships passing through the Sub’s SZ. Only each Destroyer can get a single retaliate roll @2.

    DESTROYER
    6 IPCs A2 D2 M2
    Block Sub’s Submerge (first round only) and Stealth move, both on a 1:1 basis.

    TRANSPORT
    8 IPCs A0 D0 regAA1 M2, 1 hit, taken as casualty according to owner’s choice.
    Carry 2 units, 1 Inf + 1 any ground unit
    No defense against warships,
    Beginning on the second combat round, 1 Transport can escape from Naval Battle in the same SZ at each end of combat round, if there is no enemy’s aircraft.
    Simply remove TP from battle board and place it in the SZ on the map.
    Regular AA @1 against up to 1 plane, whichever the lesser.

    Can unload in a Sub infested SZ if escorted by surface warships.

    If you bring them in with attackers - as you would for amphibious - then any defense shots in excess of what is needed to sink the accompany ships MUST be applied to any transports until all shots are accounted for or there are no units left to assign them to. (Per OOB rule.)

    CRUISER
    9 IPCs A3 D3 M3
    Shore Bombard 3
    Gives +1 move to 1 surface vessel, paired 1:1

    FLEET CARRIER
    12 IPCs A0 D2 M2, 2 hits,
    Carry 2 planes,
    damaged Carrier still carry one aircraft.

    BATTLESHIP
    15 IPCs A4 D4 M2, 2 hits,
    Shore Bombard 4

    Both repair at purchase and repair phase in a SZ adjacent to IC’s SZ, or Victory City, SZ (or Naval Base SZ, or in NB SZ).
    Naval Base cannot repair more than 3 warships hits per turn.

    FIGHTER
    9 IPCs 10 IPCs A3 D4 M4
    SBR: A2 D2, interceptors always destroy bombers first.
    Optional: on a “1” or “2” roll, selects aircraft as casualty, owner’s still choose individual plane.

    TACTICAL BOMBER
    10 IPCs 12 IPCs A4 D3 M4
    TBR: A1first strike, Damage D6 on AB or NB,
    SBR: can do escort mission for StBs without bombing AB or NB.
    Optional: on a “1” roll, select either aircraft as casualty, owner’s still choose individual plane,
    or pick any ground unit of your choice.
    on a “2” roll, pick any ground unit of your choice.

    STRATEGIC BOMBER
    12 IPCs No cost change A4 D1 M6
    SBR: AA A1first strike up to two Fighters, whichever the lesser,
    Damage on IC, AB, NB D6+2 /minimum damage 2 pts if hit by IC’s/AB or NB’s AA gun.
    No damage when destroyed by intercepting Fighters.
    Optional: on a “1” attack roll, select either aircraft as casualty, owner’s still choose individual plane,
    or pick any ground unit of your choice.

    All aircrafts can hit unsubmerged Submarines without Destroyer presence.

    ANTI-AIRCRAFT ARTILLERY
    4 IPCs A0 D1 AAx2* M1 CM or NCM, 1 hit,
    Taken as last casualty on offence.
    *Fire each round @1 first strike against up to two aircrafts, which ever the lesser.
    Regular defense @1 if there is no enemy’s plane.


  • 2017 2016

    @Baron:

    This post was first introduced in Black_Elk thread.
    It provides a different workable way of doing SBR for either 1942.2 and AA50.
    It is a punitive mechanics, as OOB G40 instead of a bonus mechanics develop previously on this actual thread.

    It is yet to be play-test to see if this can be balanced somehow.

    It is also provided so anyone can more specifically post comment on this Convoy Disruption mechanics.

    There is still a lot of issues to be able to translate this mechanic and principles into G40.
    Any help is welcome.

    Now, I can provide a complete and still simple National Convoy Disruption House rule for 1942.2. IDK if this mechanic can also works with G40.

    First thing, the Convoy SZ is to be identify with owner’s Control Marker.
    All Convoy SZs worth 4 IPCs and are bordering at least 1 TT or have an island group in it.
    These TTs can worth 0 IPC to many IPCs, this doesn’t change the 4 IPCs Convoy SZ basis.

    Here is all 1942.2 Convoy SZs I would implement (some such as SZs 2, 3, 45, 53, 57 can be considered as Allied lend-lease shipping SZs coming from either UK or US toward Russia or Australia) :

    Soviet Union 24 IPCs
    2 SZs x 4 IPCs = 8 IPCs max.
    SZ 4 (Karelia and Archangel)
    SZ 63 (Soviet Far East)

    United Kingdom 31 IPCs
    9 SZs x 4 IPCs = 36 IPCs max.
    SZs 3 (Iceland), 7 (Northern UK), 8 (Southern UK),
    SZs 10 (Eastern Canada), 13 (Gibraltar), 23 (West Africa),
    SZs 34 (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Persia), 35 (India), 40 (New Zealand), 45 (North Eastern Australia)

    United States 42 IPCs
    9 SZs x 4 IPCs = 36 IPCs max.
    SZs 2 (Greenland), 11 (US East Coast), 18 (Caribbean), 22 (Brazil),
    SZs 53 (Hawaii), 55 (Mexico West Coast), 56 (US West Coast),
    SZs 57 (Midway), 65 (Alaska/Western Canada)

    Germany 41 IPCs
    2 SZs x 4 IPCs = 8 IPCs max.
    SZ 5 (Baltic)
    SZ 15 (Italy)

    Japan 30 IPCs
    6 SZs x 4 IPCs = 24 IPCs max.
    SZs 36 (Malaya), 47 (Borneo),
    SZs 48 (Philippines), 60 (Japan), 61 (Costal China), 62 (Korea)

    The most important thing to note :
    lf at least 1 territory bordering (or the Island group within) the Convoy SZ is taken from his original owner and the Convoy SZ belong to the same owner, then this Convoy SZ is deactivated and can no longer be raided by enemy’s of the original Convoy SZ owner’s which have his control marker in this Convoy SZ.

    When such Convoy SZ is deactivated, simply flip this Nation Control Marker face downward.

    Only Submarine can raid Convoy SZ.

    During Phase 3: Conduct Combat
    Combat Sequence
    1. Strategic and tactical bombing raids AND/OR Convoy Disruption

    Each Submarine can either make a regular attack (Step 3. General combat) or a Convoy raid (Step 1. S&TBR AND/OR Convoy Disruption).
    Even if there is warships (including DD) in Convoy SZ, Submarine can still make such raid.

    Once the raid is done, Submarine cannot retreat and must stay in raided SZ.

    Each 5 IPCs Submarine can make 1 IPC + 1 to 3 IPCs damage, by rolling 1D6: 1-3 = 1-3 IPCs / 4-6 = 0 damage.
    So a single Sub always does at least 1 IPC damage (50% of the time, and more the other 50%).

    There is no defense roll and Destroyer cannot do anything about it.
    It is up to the Convoy SZ owner’s to send Destroyers (and more) on his turn to sink Subs.

    These damage and odds are for:
    5 IPCs Sub A2 first strike, D1 M2, damage: 1D6 (1-3= 1-3 / 4-6 = 0) +1 IPCs.
    6 IPCs Destroyer A2 D2 M2, cancel 1:1 Sub Submerge and Stealth Move but not first strike.

    If you want to play with OOB Sub and DD, then damage per Sub must be 2 IPCs + 1-3 IPCs.

    The odds must be different because Submarine commander must see some benefits to not attack warships.
    The odds for 5 IPCs Sub is 2/6 x 6 IPCs for DD = 2 IPCs damage on average.
    1 IPC + 1-3 IPCs gives the same 2 IPCs average.

    The odds for OOB 6 IPCs Sub are 2/6 x 8 IPCs DD = 2 2/3 IPCs
    2 IPCs + 1-3 IPCs gives 3 IPCs average but the cap is 4, which gives 2 5/6 IPCs.
    This is pretty close, and OOB Subs are lame ducks on defense vs DDs.

    Damage are immediately remove from Convoy owner’s hands, never more than 4 IPCs per SZ for the whole game round.

    And attacker must put chips under owner’s National Control Marker (1 chip per IPC damage) as a reminder for the game round of how many IPCs were raided if multiple raids occur from more than one alliance powers.

    These chips will be removed from under National Control Marker in SZ during Convoy SZ’s owner 1. Purchase and Repair Units. Step 2: Pay for Units and Repair Damaged Units
    and Facilities.

    Below, you get the picture of a modified 1942.2 map marked with these SZs.

    1942.2_Convoy SZs_V2.png


  • 2017 2016

    National Convoy Disruption House rule for AA50 1941 set up.
    Here is all AA50 Convoy SZs, 1941 set-up I would implement (some such as SZs 2, 46, 53, 57 can be considered as Allied lend-lease shipping SZs coming from either UK or US toward Russia or Australia) :

    Soviet Union 24 IPCs
    2 SZs x 4 IPCs = 8 IPCs max.
    SZ 4 (Karelia and Archangel)
    SZ 63 (Soviet Far East)

    United Kingdom 43 IPCs
    10 SZs x 4 IPCs = 40 IPCs max.
    SZs 2 (Iceland / North of UK), 8 (Southern UK), 9 (Eastern Canada), 12 (Gibraltar), 17 (French West Africa),
    SZs 34 (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Persia), 35 (India), 38 (East Indies), 46 (Solomon Islands), 47 (Eastern Australia)

    United States 40 IPCs
    9 SZs x 4 IPCs = 36 IPCs max.
    SZs 2 (Greenland / North of UK), 10 (US East Coast), 18 (Brazil), 19 (Caribbean),
    SZs 53 (Hawaii), 55 (Mexico West Coast), 56 (US West Coast),
    SZs 57 (Midway), 65 (Alaska/Western Canada)

    Germany 31 IPCs
    1 SZ x 4 IPCs = 4 IPCs max.
    SZ 5 (Baltic)

    Italy 10 IPCs
    1 SZ x 4 IPCs = 4 IPCs max.
    SZ 14 (Italy)

    Japan 17 IPCs
    6 SZs x 4 IPCs = 24 IPCs max.
    SZ 36 (South Malaya), SZ 37 (French Indo-China),
    SZ 49* (Borneo), SZ 50* (Philippines),
    SZ 61 (Coastal China), SZ 62 (Japan)
    *Deactivated on set-up.

    Below, you get the picture of a modified AA50 map marked with these SZs.

    AA50_Convoy SZs.png


Log in to reply
 

Welcome to the new forums! For security and technical reasons, we did not migrate your password. Therefore to get started, please reset your password. You may use your email address or username. Please note that your username is not your display name.

If you're having problems, please send an email to webmaster@axisandallies.org

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 6
  • 15
  • 1
  • 8
  • 9
  • 17
  • 35
  • 3
I Will Never Grow Up Games

34
Online

13.4k
Users

33.7k
Topics

1.3m
Posts