• @Baron:

    @Aldyn:

    BBs and CAs having an AA shot at the outset is more feasible, being large warships and all…  but only on the defense.  With AA shots on subsequent rounds at the END of the round, if the attacker chooses to press.

    Such addition is virtually like rising Cruiser defense to D4 and Battleship defense to D5.
    Simpler to make the change that way, no need to have a special roll against aircrafts, since there is only StBs attacking by themselves mostly in Dark Skies strategy:

    CRUISER
    A3 D4 M2-3, 1 hit Cost 12

    BATTLESHIP
    A4 D5 M2-3, 2 hits Cost 20

    I don’t see how this can really solve the Dark Skies issue however.

    That’s quite an oversimplification.  It also vastly overbalances BBs and CAs in purely naval combat, and not what I was suggesting.

    The intent of the AA shots after declaring a press is to add an element of risk to an air attacker’s decision to stay.  Making him weigh the risk of potentially continuing his attack with less than he thought.

    True, it isn’t the “silver bullet” solution for the Dark Skies strategy, but it could potentially slow down a Sealion and make a suitably equipped (presuming the Allies bother to buy CAs/BBs) Allied fleet off Gibraltar a little harder to crack, in addition to upping the difficulty/risk of Taranto and Pearl Harbor strikes.

    –-

    You could just artificially increase the StB price to 15, ala Classic.


  • This rule attempts to handle some concerns;  helpless transports against air only attacks, air attacks by bombers @ high altitude bombers were generally ineffective, any attacks in any area are really a series of sorties (they didn’t have unlimited ammo and fuel), ships are moving targets.

    Aircraft in Sea battles:

    Each aircraft declares a High or Low level attack.

    High Altitude Attack (Str and Tac Bombers only):
    Reduce attack factor by 2.  Aircraft are not subject AAA defense (see Low Level).
    Reduce defense rolls by 1.

    Low Level Attack:
    All ships have an implied AAA unit.  Acts the same as land AAA with these considerations; BB and CV units have full AAA, CA & DD have 2 shot AAA, SS none, and TR 1 shot only.  This AAA capability is only available at the start of the 2nd round of combat, except CV start at 1st round of combat (due to CV radar).  Note: Radar breakthrough adds the 1st round capability to all ships, but they do not get the hit bonus.

    IF the unfriendly force is aircraft only, for both high and low level attacks, each defending ship gets to roll 1 die at end of each round of combat.  If a 6, then the ship has evaded, and does not participate in further rounds of combat.  This roll is optional, but must evade.

    All scrambled air units do low level attacks.  If an attacking ship evades during an amphib assault it cannot bombard or land units.  (Remember evade is only available when the other side is air only).

  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    Good idea to open a thread on this issue.

    I see one situation which is not really adressed: a swarm of StBs attacking a naval fleet.
    All defender’s hits directly affects the StBs.
    As far as I understand, Dark Skies is a big detterent against US fleet moving to Gibraltar SZ.
    US player wait longer to build up a lot of Carrier and planes.

    What was suggested in previous discussion was a drastic overhaul:
    StB A3-4 D1 M6-7 cost 12, pairing 1:1 with Fg gives +1 Attack.
    TcB A4 D3 M4-5 cost 11, no need for combined arms.

    Do you see some flaws in this change?

    If someone want to playtest these features with a Dark Skies strategy, Barney has made a Triple A file which is almost like them, except TcB on defense can gives +1D to Tank paired 1:1.
    Follow the link to the original post to get the xml file.

    @barney:

    Well wasn’t able to get all of it Baron but here’s a triplea xml that has bombers A3 +1 when paired with fighter(1:1), TACs A4 D3 gives +1 to tanks D when paired 1:1. Fighter escort and interceptors A/D 2.

    Wasn’t able to get the +1 when no enemy air is present, but I don’t think that will mess things up too much. Most ships have either ACs or ABs to protect them. One fighter shutting down a slew of bmbrs would be the same as one dstry shutting down subs. Not being able to hit a lone blocker or sub killer sets them back as well as solo infrantry attacks but we’ll just play the historical strats weren’t good at hitting ships anyway. :) We probably won’t see many SBRs without fighter escort but that’s the way it goes. Their main advantage is still their range and offense can be boosted with a ftr.

    TACs get the 4 hit plus the boost to the tanks D. So they still have a connection. Not sure how that will play out but I think it will be OK. Just have to play it and see.

    Anyway gonna start a playtest right now.

    If you’re not familiar with adding XMLs to triplea: open triplea, open maps, open WW II Global zip, put the objectives there then open games and put the xml there.

    Here is also two reports from his playtests:

    @barney:

    Well I’m not done with my test game yet but it looks like the Allies are going to pull it out.

    Germany didn’t buy as many bmbrs as usual but that may have been due more to taking moderate air losses the first turn (4 planes) and Italy getting spanked in the Med. Germany built a Med fleet to try and regain the initiative and after successfully destroying a UK tranny fleet off of Guiana, was obliterated off the west coast of Gibralter by a slightly smaller Canadian fleet which suffered a mere dstry loss. Throwing good money after bad, they built a minor in Yugo and with predictable results that failed as well.

    Anyway they didn’t really have the dough to go bmbr buying. But poor strategic decisions aside, I think I would have bought a few less but still invested in them. Germany kept their TACs on the eastern front with a fighter or two for when the bmbrs came by while the bmbrs and ftrs mostly stayed in W Germany. The RD 1 attacks weren’t effected because everything is paired anyway. Didn’t do any SBRs on London.

    Japan had a -1 on the Yunnan attack wich doesn’t effect much. However with her huge air force she bought more bmbrs to pair with her ftrs. The TACs were deadly and I loaded some CVs with both TACs or ftrs for offense or defense punch. She SBR’d India to good effect since India didn’t want to risk her ftrs. US went fairly bmbr heavy as well. UK had a couple and Italy and ANZAC each had one.

    The 3 attack definitely got my attention. A bit of a mind trip after playing at 4 all these years. While some attacks were made unescorted I usually had ftrs with them. It seemed to effect Italy more since she was having to keep her ftrs at home for the most part. Also she never really got a chance to get a 2nd one. I was playing a tech heavy game and when you get Hvy bmbrs you really appreciate the extra roll.

    So it definitely slows them down a bit but their still effective at SBR’s if they get through. A little more chancy taking out solo blockers. It was fun sending solo TACs to boost small counterattacks. Next game I’ll try and get in some more SBR’s and crank up some U-boats. Get UK to trade some dstrys. See how that goes. I guess you could pair sub and bmbr +1 for a little more punch to take out blockers but that doesn’t seem very realistic to me.

    Anyway it’s fun trying something new. Makes you think a little different. I’m a low to intermediate player but it seems like a nice adjustment to me. I recommend giving it a try.

    @barney:

    Played a few more games and it seems to be working out well. SBR’s are still effective although they don’t happen quite as often. I’m somewhat conservative and like to have local air superiority before I attack. Likewise the defense doesn’t want to intercept and risk their fighters, but save them for land attack.

    Germany was able to hit London and Moscow with Tac’s along to boost their strength so they encountered no interceptors. Later when Germany was in Belarus fighter escort kept Moscow interceptors grounded. Japan was also successful against India but it did tie up some fighter escorts from other missions.
    **The main difference was,obviously,the 3 attack. Noticed it mostly when taking out single blockers. Before you could send a dude and a bomber and feel pretty confidant that the enemy would die and you’d get the territory. But with only a 3 hit I was shut down more often. Even sending a extra dude didn’t always work and sending the fighter to boost kept the fighter from another mission.

    Same thing with taking out sub killing destoyers. At least I had a carrier to send fighter backup but in the past a lot of times I would just send the bomber and a sub. Also threatening Gibralter sea zones was way weaker.

    Found myself buying more fighters (although I’ve always liked fighters) to go with bombers and more Tac’s because of their 4 hit and tank boost on defense. Had Italy can open and moved a large German stack with armor and Tac’s but don’t know if it was really that much different than normal tactics. US and Japanese bombers also felt the difference but for me anyway Germany felt it most.

    So I would say it lowers the number of bombers you build mostly due to the desire to have a fighter backup and Tac’s hitting at 4. It’s mostly when they’re on long range missions that they’re weaker. That seems more “real” to me. Tac’s were HellDivers and Stukas taking out aircraft carriers and tanks. Bombers were taking out factories, air bases and naval bases.** Without fighter escort they usually got slaughtered. But the way A&A is designed they need to be able to take out combat units as well.

    I know none of this is a revelation :) just thought I’d share my thoughts :) I like it and am going to use it as a standard.

    P

    @barney:

    I could see pairing them up to get an attack bonus. That would slow them up for sure. I’ve been using Baron’s A3 pretty consistently lately and like it a lot. Really notice it taking out solo blockers or on small counterattacks. Although I haven’t really tried mass bombers with it.

    Here is completly different way to deal with Dark Skies:

    @nerquen:

    I have a simple house rule idea for limiting bombers air blitzing abilities. Purpose of strategic bombers is

    A) to attack enemy infrastructure and thus damage enemy’s economic production and/or morale.
    B) to soften enemy’s defensive positions in preparation before a land attack.

    But strategic bombers have not been used to kill enemy units directly, at least not in significant numbers. The purpose A) in Global’40 is modeled via strategic bombing rules. Purpose B) is modeled by bombers participating in regular attacks. If you think about it, purpose B) is very similar to naval bombardment. As there is clearly no advantage of supporting amphibious landing of 1 transport with 12 cruisers (and OOB rules nicely model for this by limiting the max number of bombarding warships), there clearly shall not be much difference in a land attack of 2 inf supported by 12 bombers and 2 inf supported by 2 bombers.

    So the suggested house rule is: Attacker may bring at most as many strategic bombers into an attack as many land units he has brought or in a case of a naval battle as many warships (including subs) he has brought.

    This house rule shall have almost no impact on conventional strategies*****. It will only start to matter with stacks of bombers. Suddenly one cannot simply deter Allied fleet off Gibraltar with tons of bombers, one cannot simply keep Normandy safe by 15+ bombers and 3 mechs in W Germany. One cannot threaten air-blitz of London,Cairo,Moscow, and Gibraltar by simply stacking bombers to Rome. Germany will have to think how to bring land and naval units into its battles. Allies in Europe will be able to move small armies around not worried about being killed by 1 mech and 10 bombers.

    Also with this HR one can still possibly try to stack bombers, bomber stack shall still work fine against Moscow as Germany has tons of land units on that front. But defense of western front will be much harder.

    *****The impact on conventional strategies is that it would not allow clearing blockers and lone TT’s with bombers only. It would also make unusable “German bombers in Pacific” strategy. If one wants these still to be part of the game, then the house rule can be modified that a single bomber is allowed to participate in any battle regardless of what other units participate. Nice advantage of this rule is that it does not require any modifications to tripleA. Players just have to watch for not violating the rule.

    EDIT: As per follow-up discussion I implemented the house rule such that bombers attack @ 0 but if paired 1:1 with any land units or warships (excluding carriers) they get +4 bonus to attack.

    @nerquen:

    @nerquen:

    @Black_Elk:

    Here is an example, say you are attacking with 1 ground unit, 1 fighter and 1 bomber. After the first round of combat the ground unit is destroyed, but the fighter and bomber remain. In the second round of combat, is the bomber allowed to participate as fodder for the fighter, even though the HR does not allow the bomber itself continue attacking? Or is the bomber considered no longer part of the fight, ie it is not longer involved in the combat cannot take any enemy hits?

    For simplicity, I was thinking not to put any further restrictions on a combat once it started. The HR would really just restrict the number of bombers that one can bring into a battle, but once the battle started it would follow OOB rules. So bombers can be taken as casualties at any chosen time and can also continue battle even if all land units are dead already. This is mostly to allow game play with tripleA without any modifications.

    But with little modifications to the game xml file, one can modify bombers such that their attack value is 0, but if they are combined with any land unit or a warship in 1:1 ratio they get +4 attack bonus. It is much more realistic this way and gives space for interesting tactical decisions. Suddenly taking fighters as casualties before last few armors and artilleries supported by bombers is better for maximizing attack power. One would still be allowed to take bombers as casualties at any chosen time, I think that is ok. I will attach an xml file here soon. Â

    Here https://www.dropbox.com/s/2mbsptvi4jxi1ut/World War II Bombers HR.zip?dl=0 you can download the map with bombers having attack value of 0, but if paired with any land unit or a warship* in 1:1 ratio their attack increases to 4. Just unzip the downloaded zip file into maps subfolder of your tripleA installation. Once you launch tripleA select “World War II Global 1940 2nd Ed. - House Ruled Bombers” from the list of available games. I would be interested in any feedback if you try it. You can PM me or post here.

    • I excluded carriers here, as carriers have attack value of 0 themselves so it would felt weird if they could boost attack of bombers.
  • '17 '16

    @Baron:

    Good idea to open a thread on this issue.

    I see one situation which is not really adressed: a swarm of StBs attacking a naval fleet.
    All defender’s hits directly affects the StBs.
    As far as I understand, Dark Skies is a big detterent against US fleet moving to Gibraltar SZ.
    US player wait longer to build up a lot of Carrier and planes.

    What was suggested in previous discussion was a drastic overhaul:
    StB A3-4 D1 M6-7 cost 12, pairing 1:1 with Fg gives +1 Attack.
    TcB A4 D3 M4-5 cost 11, no need for combined arms.

    Do you see some flaws in this change?

    Thinking about a way to make StBs and Fgs complementary units, here is a special combined arms:
    StB gives to a matching Fg starting from the same TTy +1M bonus during SBR phase only.
    Fg gives to a matching StB +1A bonus.

    That way, Fg starting from AB would do long range escorting mission.


  • @Carolina:

    High Altitude Attack (Str and Tac Bombers only):
    Reduce attack factor by 2.  Aircraft are not subject AAA defense (see Low Level).
    Reduce defense rolls by 1.

    I think there are two potential problems with this, from a point of view of realism.  The first problem is that tactical aircraft don’t operate at high altitude; by definition, they’re low-level, surface-attack planes.  The second problem is that it’s virtually impossible for a high-level strategic bomber to successfully bomb something as small as a warship (especially a moving one) from high altitude with a WWII-era unguided bomb.  Even hitting specific large land targets (like factories) was hard for WWII bombers, unless they were working in large numbers and had both good aim and good luck.


  • I agree. We have had a few discussions about the Bombers attack values.

    Str Bomber - A3 against all ships every round
                      SBR 1 D6+2

    Str Bomber - A2 against all ships every round
                      SBR 1 D6+2

    Str Bomber - A3 against all ships every round
                      SBR 1 D 6+2
                      AA  1D10 A2 at Str Bombers only due to size and speed.

    I’ve have also used D8’s A2  for AA shots at all planes in a game. Was a bit strong.

  • '17 '16

    @Carolina:

    This rule attempts to handle some concerns; helpless transports against air only attacks, air attacks by bombers @ high altitude bombers were generally ineffective, any attacks in any area are really a series of sorties (they didn’t have unlimited ammo and fuel), ships are moving targets.

    Aircraft in Sea battles:

    Each aircraft declares a High or Low level attack.

    High Altitude Attack (Str and Tac Bombers only):
    Reduce attack factor by 2. Aircraft are not subject AAA defense (see Low Level).
    Reduce defense rolls by 1.

    Low Level Attack:
    All ships have an implied AAA unit. Acts the same as land AAA with these considerations; BB and CV units have full AAA, CA & DD have 2 shot AAA, SS none, and TR 1 shot only. This AAA capability is only available at the start of the 2nd round of combat, except CV start at 1st round of combat (due to CV radar). Note: Radar breakthrough adds the 1st round capability to all ships, but they do not get the hit bonus.

    IF the unfriendly force is aircraft only, for both high and low level attacks, each defending ship gets to roll 1 die at end of each round of combat. If a 6, then the ship has evaded, and does not participate in further rounds of combat. This roll is optional, but must evade.

    All scrambled air units do low level attacks. If an attacking ship evades during an amphib assault it cannot bombard or land units.  (Remember evade is only available when the other side is air only).

    Each aircraft declares a High or Low level attack.
    I believe you are splitting (h)air…  :wink:

    From a gameplay POV, it is an additional layer which delay game with a non-necessary option.

    Simply gives 1 full AA per warship.
    (I prefer BB and Cruiser because they are sub-optimal compared to Carrier, but it is simply a matter of taste.)

    Strangely, the evade capacity should be use when there is no aircraft, because ocean is a wide empty space and ships needed air recon to know where was the enemy fleet.
    I believe battle of Midway gives some credits to the better US air recon than japanese.

    So it becomes a double-edge:
    1- Brings planes to keep an eye on enemy’s ships but you suffer enemy’s AA defense
    2- Brings no plane against enemy warships, they can evade from your only naval attack.

  • '17 '16

    @Young:

    What can be done to prevent German players from deploying a “Dark Skies” strategy? I don’t want to see it abolished altogether, but there should be something to slow down this gimmicky gambit.

    I’ll get it started with the following ideas…

    • Bombers conducting SBRs only receive a +2 damage bonus if they have departed from an operational airbase
    • During air battles with interceptors, roll 1 dice @1 per bomber formation instead of 1 dice @1 per bomber.
    • All hits from an air defence of any kind must be applied to participating strategic bombers first.

    Here is a summary table for this special SBR Strategic bomber as a group in dogfight:

    • During air battles with interceptors, roll 1 dice @1 per bomber formation instead of 1 dice @1 per bomber.
      -Damage to IC is 1D6+2

    StB A1 as a group and Fg A1 D1 : damage 1D6+2

    1 Strategic Bomber doing SBR against no interceptor
    Sum: + 4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 against 1 Fg D1
    Sum: + 5.486 - 3.667 = + 1.819 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: + 4.85 - 5.056 = - 0.206 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 doing SBR against 3 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: + 4.319 - 6.213 = - 1.894 IPCs damage/StB run

    1 StB A1 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 3 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: 7.578 - 6.954 = + 0.624 IPC damage/StB run

    1 StB A1 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: +7.775 - 5.33 = + 2.445 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D1
    Sum: + 7.639 - 3.667 = + 3.972 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A1+A0 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    A1 vs 1D1: + 5.486 - 3.667 = + 1.819 IPCs
    A0 vs 1D1: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC
    Sum: + 9.305 - 7.334 = + 1.971 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A1+A0 doing SBR against 1 interceptors D1
    A1 vs 1D1 : + 5.486 - 3.667 = + 1.819 IPCs
    A0 vs no : + 4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs
    Sum: + 10.069 - 5.667 = + 4.402 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers doing SBR against no interceptor
    Sum: + 9.166 - 4 = +5.166 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A1+A0 doing SBR against 3 interceptors D1
    A1 vs 1D1: + 5.486 - 3.667 = + 1.819 IPCs
    A0 vs 2D1: + 3.183 - 5.056 = - 1.873 IPC
    Or
    A1 vs 2D1: + 4.850 - 5.056 = - 0.206 IPCs
    A0 vs 1D1: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC
    Sum: + 8.669 - 8.723 = - 0.054 IPC damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A1+A0 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 3 interceptors D1
    A1+A1 vs 2D1: +7.775 - 5.330 = + 2.445 IPCs
    A0 vs D1: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC
    Sum: + 11.594 - 8.997 = + 2.597 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A1+A0 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 2 interceptors D1
    A1+A1 vs D1:+ 7.639 - 3.667 = + 3.972 IPCs
    A0 vs D1: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC
    Sum: + 11.458 - 7.334 = + 4.124 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A1+A0 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    A1+A1 vs D1:+ 7.639 - 3.667 = + 3.972 IPCs
    A0 vs no: + 4.583 - 2 = + 2.583 IPCs
    Sum: + 12.222 - 5.667 = + 6.555 IPCs damage/SBR run


    G1940 OOB SBR:
    1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
    Sum: +4.583 - 2 = +2.583 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 against 1 Fg D1
    Sum: + 5.486 - 3.667 = + 1.819 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: + 4.85 - 5.056 = - 0.206 IPC damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 3 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: 7.578 - 6.954 = + 0.624 IPC damage/StB run

    1 StB & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: +7.775 - 5.33 = + 2.445 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 StBs A1 doing SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: +10.973 - 7.334 = + 3.639 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D1
    Sum: + 7.639 - 3.667 = + 3.972 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 StBs A1 doing SBR against 1 intercepting Fg D1
    Sum: +11.459 - 5.666 = + 5.793 IPCs damage/SBR run

    1 StB A1 doing SBR against 3 intercepting Fgs D1
    Sum: + 4.319 - 6.213 = - 1.894 IPCs damage/StB run

    OOB G40: 1 StB A1 doing SBR against 3 intercepting Fgs D1

    StB roll / interceptors Fgs roll / AAA roll = odds casualties

    1/691/2166/6= 546/7776  1 StB killed by Fgs vs 1 Fg
    1/6125/2161/6 = 125/7776 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
    1/6125/2165/6 = 625/7776 no casualty vs 1 Fg

    5/691/2166/6 = 2730/7776  1 StB killed by Fgs vs no casualty
    5/6125/2161/6 = 625/7776  1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
    5/6125/2165/6 = 3125/7776 no casualty at all

    Results:
    Bombard on IC: 3750/7776= 48.23% * ((1+2) +(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 2.652 IPCs
    Killing 1 Fg: 1296/7776= 16.67% +10 IPCs = + 1.667 IPCs
    StB killed: 4026/7776= 51.77%
    -12 IPCs = - 6.213 IPCs

    Sum: + 4.319 - 6.213 = - 1.894 IPCs damage/StB run

    OOB G40: 1 StB A1 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 3 intercepting Fgs D1

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

    1/3616/2166/6  = 96/46656  1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fg vs 2 Fgs
    1/3675/2161/6 =  75/46656  1 Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs 2 Fgs
    1/3675/2165/6 =   375/46656  1 Fg vs 2 Fgs
    1/36125/2161/6 = 125/46656  1 StB killed by AAA vs 2 Fgs
    1/36125/2165/6 = 625/46656  no casualty vs 2 Fgs

    10/3616/2166/6 = 960/46656  1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fg vs 1 Fg
    10/3675/2161/6= 750/46656  1 Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
    10/3675/2165/6 = 3750/46656 1 Fg vs 1 Fg
    10/36125/2161/6 = 1250/46656  1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg
    10/36125/2165/6 = 6250/46656  no casualty vs 1 Fg

    25/3616/2166/6 = 2400/46656   1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fg vs no casualty
    25/3675/2161/6 = 1875/46656   1 Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
    25/3675/2165/6 = 9375/46656  1 Fg vs no casualty
    25/36125/2161/6 = 3125/46656  1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty
    25/36125/2165/6 = 15625/46656 no casualty at all

    Results:
    Bombard on IC: 36000/46656 * ((1+2) +(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = + 4.244 IPCs
    Killing 2 Fgs: 1296/46656 +20 IPCs = + 0.556 IPC
    Killing 1 Fg: 12960/46656 +10 IPCs = + 2.778 IPCs
    Fg killed: 13500/46656
    -10 IPCs = - 2.894 IPCs
    StB killed: 4500/46656
    -12 IPCs = - 1.157 IPCs
    StB & Fg killed: 6156/46656*-22 IPCs = - 2.903 IPCs

    Sum: 7.578 - 6.954 = + 0.624 IPC damage/StB run

  • '17 '16

    2 Strategic Bombers doing SBR against no interceptor
    Sum: + 9.166 - 4 = +5.166 IPCs damage/SBR run

    2 Strategic Bombers A1+A0 & 1 Fg A1 doing SBR against 1 interceptor D1
    A1+A1 vs D1:+ 7.639 - 3.667 = + 3.972 IPCs
    A0 vs no: + 4.583 - 2 = + 2.583 IPCs
    Sum: + 12.222 - 5.667 = + 6.555 IPCs damage/SBR run

    Comparing these two situations, it reveals that when there is a similar number of escorting and intercepting Fgs, it is better for the defender to not intercept.
    Intercepting means increasing odds in favor of the attacker.
    Here, it gives +1.389 IPCs damage/SBR run.
    Same as G40 OOB, 3.972- 2.583 = + 1.389 IPCs.

    So YG, your idea to put bomber as first target in SBR dogfight might encourage interceptions.

    The break even point for attacker and defender is this situation:
    2 Strategic Bombers A1+A0 doing SBR against 3 interceptors D1
    A1 vs 1D1: + 5.486 - 3.667 = + 1.819 IPCs
    A0 vs 2D1: + 3.183 - 5.056 = - 1.873 IPC
    OR
    A1 vs 2D1: + 4.850 - 5.056 = - 0.206 IPCs
    A0 vs 1D1: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC
    Sum: + 8.669 - 8.723 = - 0.054 IPC damage/SBR run

    This means that as long as you keep only 1 StB below the interceptors number, you keep an even score near 0.00 IPCs. Each additional 1 StB vs 1Fg increase by 0.152 IPC/SBR

    Example : 7 StBs 1A1 6A0 vs 8 Fg D1
    -0.054 + 5*(+0.152) = +0.706 IPC/SBR

    For comparison, in OOB G40 SBR (D6+2 damage), the break even point is:
    OOB G40 even point: 4 StBs A1 + 1 Fg A1 against 9 Fgs D1

    In your SBR HR (damage 1D6+2), you would be near +0.100 IPCs:
    2 StBs (1A1, 1A0) vs 3 Fg + 8.669 - 8.723 = - 0.054 IPC damage/SBR run
    1 StB A0 vs 1 Fg D1: + 3.819 - 3.667 = + 0.152 IPC
    Sum: + 12.488 - 12.390 = + 0.098
    YG HR SBR even point: 3 StBs (1A1 +2A0) against 4 Fgs D1.

    If all StBs have no offence A0, and D6+2 damage,
    The break even point is:
    8 StBs A0 vs 9 Fgs D1 near +0.007

    Below 8 StBs if there is 1 more Fg than StB, it is pro-defense.
    If there is an even number of StBs against the same number of Fgs, it is pro-offense.

    If all StBs have no offence A0, and D6+3 damage,
    The break even point is:
    7 StBs A0 vs 10 Fgs D1 near -0.065

    At 3 StBs A0 vs 5 Fgs D1 ratio, it is pro-defense
    At 4 StBs A0 vs 5 Fgs D1 ratio, it is pro-offense.

  • '17 '16

    Another daring fix is to forbid Strategic Bombers to hit planes, whether in land or naval combat. Only naval or ground units can be taken as casualty.

    That way, all Fighters and Tactical Bombers can survive a swarm of Strat Bombers.
    And needs other kind of units to conquer a land territory.

    However, surface warships and TPs becomes much vulnerable because you cannot use Fgs as shields.
    Battleships and Carriers becomes much easier to target and sink.


    Another fix which is less potent against StBs is to make all Carriers able to carry 3 Fighters or TacBs instead of just 2 as OOB. It is Black_Elk idea.
    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35415.msg1383361#msg1383361

    To get the better balance, maybe it needs to be put with similar Transport changes such as
    suggested earlier:

    TRANSPORT
    7 IPCs A0 D0 *AA1 M2-3 (NB), 1 hit, taken last as casualty
    Carry 2 units, 1 Inf + 1 any ground unit
    No defense against warships.

    Beginning on the second 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 same SZ on the map.

    *Regular AA @1 against up to 1 plane each combat round, whichever the lesser.

  • Sponsor

    Hey BM, sorry I haven’t read through your posts before throwing out another idea, but how about this…

    Strategic Bombers

    Cost - 12 IPCs
    Move - 6 (+1 from OAB)
    Attack @3
    Defend @2

    (Basically everything the same but drop the attack value from @4 to @3, and boost their defence value from @1 to @2)

    This might also solve the cruiser issue by putting the bombers attack value on par with cruisers which cost the same, specialties for bombers would still be SBR, and specialties for cruisers would still be shore bombardment.

  • '17 '16

    I like it too.
    A3 D2 with no combined arms is simpler.
    I truly believe StB should have a basic 3 attack because of the long range capacity.

    It helps also when compared with Cruiser.

  • Sponsor

    @Baron:

    I like it too.
    A3 D2 with no combined arms is simpler.
    I truly believe StB should have a basic 3 attack because of the long range capacity.

    It helps also when compared with Cruiser.

    I prefer simple

  • '17 '16

    However,
    I still would upgrade Tactical Bomber attack to 4 pure and simple.
    TcB
    Attack 4
    Defense 3
    Move 4-5
    Cost 11 IPCs or 12 IPCs.
    SBR A1 Damage 1D6 IPCs.

  • '17 '16

    @SS:

    I agree. We have had a few discussions about the Bombers attack values.

    Str Bomber - A3 against all ships every round
                       SBR 1 D6+2

    Str Bomber - A2 against all ships every round
                       SBR 1 D6+2

    Str Bomber - A3 against all ships every round
                       SBR 1 D 6+2
                       AA   1D10 A2 at Str Bombers only due to size and speed.

    I’ve have also used D8’s A2  for AA shots at all planes in a game. Was a bit strong.

    Do you imply that it stay @4 in land combat?
    StBs seems historically not that good against ground troops neither.
    Maybe A2 D1 with lower cost but higher damage in SBR would appear more accurate?


  • Baron yes. Ground attacks by Str Bombers should be lower values to. I was just responding to the naval.

    I’m just trying to keep it simple with only 1 or 2 changes.

    Str Bombers -   A4  against naval
                          A3 D1 against ground
                          SBR 1D6+2
                          Battleships and Cruisers 1 AA shot each with a cap on AA shots

    Str Bombers -   A3  against naval
                          A3 D1 against ground
                          SBR 1D6+2
                          AA 1D10 A2 only against Str Bombers.


  • Re: the SS post on a D1 or D2 on naval…. When would a Str Bomber defend against naval fire?  They don’t scramble.  Right?


  • I removed the Str Bomber Defense value.


  • Its interesting that such a change on bombers has started so much discussion.  The classic game was A4/D1 cost 15.  I wonder why the cost was dropped to 12?  At price of 12 they are too potent.  I would agree the values should be changed to A3/D2.  I just cannot get around the fact that Str Bombers were just not effective against moving targets - land, air, or sea.

    I see 3 things that could be done;
    A4/D1 cost 15
    or A3/D2 cost 12
    or A4/D1 cost 12, hits cannot be applied to Fighters or Tac Bombers.

    It all cases, BB and CA should get a AA roll.


  • Then make it

    A3 D1 M6 C15 but no Battleship or Cruiser AA shot

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 5
  • 24
  • 7
  • 5
  • 583
  • 242
  • 602
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

54

Online

17.0k

Users

39.2k

Topics

1.7m

Posts