My math was flawed as well. While doing analysis I used Auto-sum in excel to calculate my totals but forgot I had used numbers for my header columns. This inflate my average damage by .6 or .7. Very silly mistake. However That would not change my assessment.
Posts made by Warwick
RE: Convoy raiding
Your math is flaw. The median result is zero however since there are no negative results the average damage is as I listed. If the defending escorts rolls a 4 it makes no difference if I roll a 1 through 4 however on a 5 or 6 damage is inflicted. Therefore the average damage at a flat modifier (+0 total) when the escort rolls a 4 is .5 IPC. 1 IPC on a 5 and 2 IPC on a 6 means 3 total IPC across 6 outcomes or .5 IPC on average.
The Germans build an airbase in Normady. This allows them to greatly effect the convoy war. Medium bombers based out of Normandy can wreck havoc on England’s economy through Strat Bombing as well as naval attacks. If the English devote their fighters to CAP then England is undefended and the bombers can strike with limited risk (AA). If England defends the factories then the bombers can hunt escorts supported by subs. If CVs pursue the subs off the special spots you have designated then the Land Based aircraft can scramble to make the fight a poor outcome or launch a counter attack in their turn.
I do not argue that Germany has significant advantage in the Atlantic, rather the rules as they stand allow the Germans to engage in a plan that they can turn to their favor through appropriate application of resources and good decisions.
RE: Blitz Support
Light’s can not blitz but I would allow them to support a blitz.
1 Medium Tank could add 1 Mech (as per current rules) and 1 Lt Arm., SPG (arty), or 1 Arm. Car (recon). So the 2 Medium armor would blitz with 2 Lt tanks and 2 mechanized for instance.
On casualties the SPG would support from the rear with indirect fire and recon elements (the light tanks and armor cars) would be used to find the enemy but not engage. The actual fighting would have been conducted by medium tanks and the mech inf. However the reason for the rule is to avoid giving Armor more fodder unit on a blitz.
AN other option is to expand the list of unit that can pair with a medium from just Mech Inf to Mech Inf plus all the addition armor units. This would replace Mech with Armor Cars as they have a 3 attack and cost 3 rather than a 2 attack and cost 4 like the mech inf.
My group will try the rules out and see how they play. Could be fun could be a disaster.
I play the HBG Global 36/39 version of Global Axis and Allies. (Look away SS before your eyes burn ) I have several of the additional pieces they make including light tanks, SPG, and tank destroyers for all nations. One of the problems with these pieces is their increase cost does not justify their purchase over the basic units. (This is true in the SPG and TD case.) I was looking at ways to improve the use of these units. I was thinking of trying the following rule and would like feedback.
“Blitz Support” - any unit tagged with this ability can participate in a blitz but can not initiate a blitz. A unit with blitz support can pair with a blitzing armor at a 1:1 basis. This pairing does not interfere with that armor ability to pair with a mechanized. Support units based on their use during a blitz must be taken last as casualties.
Lt armor, SPG, tank destroyers, and armored cars would all be listed as blitz support. My biggest concern was adding attrition style kills (armored cars cost 3 IPP same as INF) to a blitzing stack so I included a caveat that they cannot be taken as casualties until the end of combat. However this allows 2 Medium tanks to blitz with a 6 unit force now which makes defense in depth issues in Russia much more complicated. I am concern this rule could make a Russian defense much more difficult.
I think I will introduce this rule at our next game and see if the group wants to try it, however I would also like feedback if it is a good idea or completely unbalancing.
RE: Global War 1936/39 Expansions
We play with Croatia, Netherlands, Manchuria, Spanish Civil War, and the Railroad expansions. We plan to add the DAK and the Turkish expansion in our next game. I like the DAK as it provides Germany to some flexibility to effect the Med theater. The Turkish expansion is nice since it involves all 3 factions.
The “Cavalry” unit represents horse mounted troops so Cavalry seems an appropriate name. These forces fought on foot and traveled on horse back like dragoons but they were still Cavalry.
I think one of a problems with so many units is the fact existing units do the same job but better. The DD is just as dangerous as the CA and the CL, based on IPP cost, and you can deploy more of them for the same money. What good does it do to add a Plan Z with 8 new ships types when you can accomplish the same outcome more efficiently with the basic unit types.
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
I am not sure where the confusion lies with Japan and war declaration.
“Each nation has different conditions under which it can declare war which are listed on their National Reference Sheet. In some cases, the nation only needs to reach its full Wartime Income level. In other cases there are more conditions to be met. Once you are able to declare war you may do so at any time, even during another player’s turn.”
This is the rule regarding declaring war. Now granted it is poorly word the line “more conditions” should read “different conditions”. However it clearly states the national reference sheet lists the condition to declare war. Japan’s are simple. They can declare war on any nation other than Italy and Germany. Using information from other National Reference sheets obscures the matter. For each nation only the core rules and its reference sheet apply.
Japan has no income criteria to declare war. There is no “governing principle” that a nation must be at full income to declare war, however to execute the war to it fullest extent certainly. Russia can declare on Japan in Jan 1939 if that is a strategically valuable option to the Russian. He must wage that war with 8 IPP per turn plus the d12 after July '39 but he may invade Manchuria and kill Japanese units to his fullest ability.
I will also add my voice in support of a version 1.3 (as well as a 1.4 and 1.5) to clean up different grey area and bad wording.
If you would like to see the extent of the shenanigans that the rules currently allow following an Axis War Dec.
German war dec a minor
Russia …. Declares war on Domincian Republic
Monroe Doctrine triggered
USA responds with war dec on Russia
USA goes to 76 IPC
Russia goes to 45
USA War dec Germany and Japan (probably attacked someone by Germany first attack)
UK War Decs Russia
Uk War Decs germany
France War Decs Russia
France War decs Germany
Germany completes invasion of minor thinking “WTF!!!”
Allies and Soviets all go full production and consume the Axis player before facing down in a final clash of the titans, most likely won by the Allies.
RE: Convoy raiding
Lets examine a strategy and a set of assumptions…
The situation prior to US entry.
The UK has 2 carriers, one in the med and one in the Pacific. These will need to be pulled from their stations or the Atlantic is defenseless until new carriers are built.
The Axis takes France … this generally occurs in 1938 in our games.
The Axis builds an airbase in Normandy.
The Axis station 2 Medium Bombers and 2 Ftr. Required IPC 21 with 21 existing Air IPC being committed to this operation.
The Axis station Ftr/Float Planes/Medium Bombers on Sardina 2 or so. 11 IPC required.
The Axis builds 3 Subs per turn to support Atlantic operations.
The UK to cover the 7 atlantic convoy spaces require 7 DDs or other vessels. This is the entire DD force the Brits possess plus one Torpedo Boat Destroyer. Since the Lt Carriers will not have DD escorts now and they wish to keep their speed up they will require CAs to protect them. This means your 2 hunter killer groups have an 87% kill rate against subs. It also means that every DD/CA/CVL that started the game is occupied with fighting subs. This is 124 IPC of naval forces tied down in the Atlantic. Now this could be overkill but lets assume a player adopts this strategy to hard stop the German Sub war.
Lets examine the exchanges from the perspective of the UK player
Solo DD escort - attacked by Sub plus land based (of the 7 spaces 5 are in range of Normandy) - -5 IPC per attack
Solo FTR CAP - attacked by Sub plus land based - -5.8 IPC
Solo Sub - attacked by Hunter Killer group - +0.7 IPC
Solo Sub - attacked by Hunter Killer Group (w Brit Sub for casulaties) - +2 IPC
Solo Sub - attacked by CAP - +2.5 IPC
Hunter Killer Group - attacked by subs and landbased air - -25IPC
If the UK player spreads out and covers the convoy lines the German player hits his DDs with his subs. The German play can hit 2 spots easily and the Italian can hit one more. That is 3 DDs a turn lost for an average of one sub, -19IPC per turn. The responding hunter-killer groups pull this average down to a -15IPC net assuming the UK player commits subs to the defense as well. In other words the German Player is spending 15 IPC to attack the Atlantic while the UK player has to spend 30 IPC to defend it. Since the German player generally has 45 to 55 points after the Fall of France this is trivial to maintain. And this is without actually raiding with a sub. Since I am only threatening to raid 11 points a turn. The UK players would be better served ignoring the sub war.
By removing the roll against subs you make any attack on a convoy a profitable venture. With 2 escort on a line a sub will still produce 1.6 IPC of damage, 1 escort is 2 IPC, while 0 produces 2.9 IPC damage. If one escort gets to fire the numbers move to 2 escort - -0.1 IPC … 1 Escort - 0.5 IPC … 0 Escort 2.9 IPC damage though this will vary based on the number of subs attacking the line. If one escort the second sub will not get attacked.
While this is a crude analysis it represents the concerns I would have reducing the damage roll to just the same space. I look forward to any new information your create based on actual game play. Good luck
RE: GW36 Japanese Strategy, Refusing the Dragon.
I think that 22 IPC is from the 1939 war where they have overrun part of China. It should not be their “wartime” income in 1936 since Japan can declare war on the US on turn one but will not go up to 22 (Their initial wartime income is 16). However Japan can declare war on most any nation they wish. On the reference sheet for each nations is usually a chart showing whom they can attack and what condition apply. For Japan they can not declare on Germany or Italy but anyone else seems fair game.
RE: Convoy raiding
“Two U-boats had been destroyed 40 miles from the convoy he was protecting”
Walker was on escort duty. Those escorts are doing exactly what Walker did by patrolling the convoy line. Also each piece is not one DD rather about 20 DD, same with subs. The attack roll represents the efficiency of the DDs hunting down subs on that line. I do restricted escort to one roll regardless the number of subs. The term sub chasing does not mean “Subs were sighted of the coast of France. Move a small fleet to that position and start hunting.” rather an escort ships would make contact with a sub then pursue and kill. What Walker did was instead of turning back to the convoy to protect them he would finish the kill then return.
With the Brits having 2 carriers at the start this would limit them to killing 2 subs per turn (aside from coastal zones that the Germans can avoid). This would mean that Germany spending 15 IPP a turn on subs(9 with shipyards) would flood the Atlantic more subs than the UK could kill. This does not seem a realistic kill rate for subs.