@GEN-MANSTEIN Hmm. That might just about work as-is. It looks like the Germans haven’t actually captured any Russian territory yet, about would be where they were just before Operation Barbarossa kicked off. Which is what I was trying to do. What conversion rate were you using for naval units? I was thinking something like 1 A&A piece = 4 real battleships or carriers, 6-8 cruisers (won’t differentiate between CA/CL), 12-15 destroyers, and maybe 20 subs.
Latest posts made by almashir
RE: Global War Barbarossa
RE: Global War Barbarossa
@GEN-MANSTEIN Oh, Sorry. I can see how that would be confusing. I was using Barbarossa mostly as a means to identify the starting point as the Summer of '41. But I was planning on using the whole map. I figure it’s a six month turn, so the invasion of Russia starts at the beginning of the first turn, and Pearl Harbor would happen at the end of the first turn. A bit of an abstraction, but it makes other things work out. I’ll search for your setup. It’s probably pretty close to what I need, except the Russians have been beat up a bit, and pushed back a territory or two.
Global War Barbarossa
Okay, I’ve been mulling this over for a while. I have the second version of the 1939 map, and I’ve been thinking of making some house rules for a start date of Summer 1941. This is primarily because I want the game simplified enough to be playable and make it easy to teach new players. I’m not a fan of the diplomatic stuff. I just want to get straight into the action. I also want Vichy/Free French dispositions already settled. But I don’t want a 1942 start date, because a lot of strategic decisions were already made by that point, and players (especially the Germans) are locked in to making a lot of the same mistakes they did historically. (Yes, I know getting involved in a land war in Asia is the big one, but there’s no getting around that. LOL)
The idea is that the U.S. would be in the war by the end of round one, so there would be no need to track U.S. entry status. The war in North Africa is still going on, and the Axis have another turn (maybe two) to try to win it before the U.S. tips the scales. I’d also simplify the units. No differentiation between tactical bombers and navy tactical bombers/torpedo bombers. A tank is a tank, and they all have the same attack/defense, regardless of nation. Same with all other combat units. No SS, Guards, etc. Still going back and forth on whether or not to have the economic prices standardized across nationalities, or maybe keeping the cost differences to discourage, say, massive Japanese tank armies rampaging across Asia all the way to Moscow.
That said, I’d still want airborne units, along with transport aircraft to carry them (as opposed to having them dropped from bombers or abstracting the transports). And marines. Both would operate in a similar manner. When dropped by air, paras get a +1 to attack on the first round of combat, after which they operate like regular infantry. Marines work the same way when making amphibious attacks. Also, tanks, mech infantry, and artillery have the same attack as regular infantry on the first round of combat when making an amphibious landing. Each nation limited to building one marine and one paratroop per turn.
Factories have no limit on the number of units they produce each turn. Instead they are limited to a multiple of the number of IPCs printed on the area in which they are located. This will allow a bit of flexibility, but should prevent the construction of things like capital ships in places that weren’t historically capable of making them. Small factories can produce up to 6 times the printed IPC value of the territory, and for large factories it’s 10 times the value. A large factory can only be built in an area worth at least 4 IPCs. Example: a small factory in Calcutta could produce 18 IPCs worth of units per turn. A large factory in Turin could produce 40 IPCs worth of units.
I’m still tweaking the starting forces and dispositions. I’m also toying with the idea of combining the turns of some countries. My current thinking on turn order is:
Britain(both maps)/Free France/USA/ANZAC/Nationalist China
USA can enter the war on turn 1 regardless of what anyone else does. This will allow Pearl Harbor and the invasion of the Philippines, as well as the opening salvo of Barbarossa.
I’m sure I’m missing some of the implications of these changes. If anyone has any suggestions or sees any glaring oversights, please let me know. Thanks in advance.
I’ve been thinking a lot about how to modify Global 1939 to make it less complicated, and playable in less time. Here are a few ideas I’ve been toying with:
- Change the start date to either June or December 1941. Barring outrageously bad dice rolling or very poor decisions on the part of Germany, it’s pretty much inevitable that Poland and France are going to fall. While it’s kind of fun to play out the Battle of France, it does add time and complexity. By using a later start date you eliminate having to figure out what units and territories go Vichy. Also, I don’t particularly enjoy tracking the diplomacy aspect of the game, and I like to eliminate keeping up with American entry status and production limits. I’m leaning toward the following:
a. Start in June 1941 (the eve of Barbarossa). Turn order:
i. Germany, Italy, Vichy, and Axis minors
ii. Russia and Communist China
iii. Atlantic British, Pacific British, ANZAC
v. USA and Nationalist China
b. I’d position the Japanese starting forces so they can recreate Pearl Harbor and the invasion of the Philippines on turn one, if that’s what they want to do. It’s sort of fudging the time line a bit by segueing from Summer to Winter of 1941 in the same turn. But, given the geographic separation of the European and Pacific theaters, I think we can get away with it. By letting the Germans play out the opening moves of Barbarossa, instead of starting in December 1941, it saves having to figure out what the aftermath of the first turn of the invasion of Russia would look like. It also gives the German player the flexibility to modify his strategy a bit from what the Germans did historically.
Eliminate most of the special units, such as SS, U.S. and Japanese carrier aircraft, heavy tanks, etc. Apart from cutting down on complexity, this helps a bit with crowding on the European map, since you can represent all your tanks or infantry with one stack, instead of having a separate stack for SS, Guards, etc. So each country has the same units available for purchase. But I’m still deciding whether or not to keep country specific attack/defense values and/or purchase prices. I’m more inclined to retain the differences in purchase prices to discourage unrealistic things, like massive Japanese tank armies or Russian aircraft carriers. I’d like to keep paratroops, and probably marines. Allow anyone to build them, but make them more expensive for countries that historically didn’t. Also use a separate air transport unit, instead of using bombers to drop paratroops. Air transport: Cost 6/Attack 0/Defense 0/Move 4 (loaded) or 6 (unloaded). Paratroop: Cost 4/Attack 2(3 on first round of combat if air dropped)/Defense 4/Move 1.
Modify factory production. Instead of major ICs building 10 units and minors building 3, change it to a multiple of the economic value of the territory. Majors can build up to 10 times the printed value, and minors can build 3 times the value. So a territory with a printed value of 4 could build 40 IPCs worth of units with a major IC, or 12 IPCs worth of units with a minor IC. This keeps battleships from being built in, say, Siam or Australia. Modify damage from strategic bombing accordingly. In other words, one point of damage reduces the multiplier by 1, so a minor IC with one point of damage can only produce 2 times the printed value of the territory.
Now it’s a matter of coming up with starting forces and initial deployments. I’ve got a copy of World in Flames I can use to convert the starting forces from the 1941 scenarios. Does anyone have any suggestions for different sources to use? Or any suggestions about other rules to modify to keep the game moving?
RE: Central Powers Navy?
Hi, CWO Marc,
I wrote the previous post on my lunch break at work, and didn’t have access to all my research, so I was going off memory to some extent. I’ve checked, and you are pretty much right about the secondary armament on post-Dreadnaught BBs. They seemed to range between 5 inch and 6 inch for secondaries on post Dreadnaught BBs for the most part. As for BCs, I’m seeing at least 8 main guns on all classes except the British Courageous and Renown classes, (although they had 15 inch main guns). But several classes were configured so they could only present 6 guns at any one time toward a single enemy due to their firing arcs, since some turrets were not mounted on the centerline.
But, given the scale of A&A, would you stick with the numbers I’ve suggested for initial set up? Or would you tweak them one way or the other for the sake of realism? I know we’ll never get 100% accuracy, given the abstract nature of the game, but I’d like to create as closely as possible the overall strategic balance.
RE: Central Powers Navy?
Personally, I modify the starting forces to more accurately reflect what each side really had available. I researched it for quite a while, and my best estimate of what each side actually had in 1914 was:
BB/BC Pre-DN BB Cruisers Subs
Britain 34 41 102
Germany 21 22 47 29
France 4 15 24
Austria 4 9 11
Italy 6 10 8
Russia 4 9 14
USA 10 21 33
Turkey 1 2 4
I am counting the modern (post Dreadnaught) battleships (BBs)and battlecruisers (BCs) as basically the same. Historically, the BCs were a bit faster that the BBs, but more lightly armored. Their firepower was about the same (typically 8-12 main guns of 11in-12in caliber, arranged mostly 2 guns per turret). They would also have secondary guns of 6in-8in, (which would be considered main guns on cruisers) and tertiary guns of 3in-5in. Pre-Dreadnaught BBs would typically be slower and have 2 turrets with 1-2 main guns each (still usually 11in-12in), and more reliance on secondary guns for throw weight. They also had lighter armor than the modern BBs. In theory, they should have been only slightly less effective than modern BBs. In practice, combining different calibers made gunnery a bit trickier, since you could not always tell whether a given hit (or splash) was a 12in round or an 8in round. So it was harder to adjust fire and get on target. All in all, it is probably best to count the pre-DN BBs as being closer to cruisers than battleships.
There were a few considerations when converting to A&A numbers. The U.S. fleet would have been split between the Atlantic and Pacific. The British had a fair number of subs, but they used them primarily for coastal defense, so they were mostly out of play. The Russian and Turkish ships tended to be mostly obsolete. That said, here is what I would suggest for starting forces:
Battleships Cruisers Subs
Britain 3 8
Germany 2 4 4
France 1 2
Austria 1 1
Italy 1 1
Russia 1 1
USA 1 1
Turkey 0 1
For deployments, I would follow OOB, except:
2 British cruisers off the coast of Egypt
All British BBs plus any cruisers not otherwise deployed in home waters
1 German cruiser somewhere in the South Atlantic
All German ships not otherwise deployed in home waters
RE: Lend-Lease improvement
I remember some ideas being batted around concerning lend-lease in a thread a few months back. I think the consensus for the best option was something like the Allies automatically get a +2 to the die roll. However, this is reduced by one for each Axis sub or surface warship in the Russian convoy box north of Scotland (if the aid is going to Russia) or the British convoy box east of Washington (if it is going to Britain). I suppose you could use the British convoy box by the Solomons for the FEC/ANZAC. It was also suggested that since, historically, quite a bit of aid was sent through Iran, Axis land units occupying it could also negatively affect the roll.
RE: Liberating Paris - House Rule?
Maybe for the first turn the French collect income after Paris is liberated, the money is stored in London. It can still be used to buy Free French infantry that can be placed on any surviving factories in France. But if it is used to buy any units other than infantry, they are placed in London. If the Germans immediately recapture Paris, the income stays in London, to be used by the Free French. If the Germans fail the recapture Paris on the first turn after losing it, the French are considered to have re-established their ability to produce tanks, planes, ships, etc inside France. After that point, if the Germans recapture it, they should probably get the loot.