Global War 1940 2nd ed.

[General 6 Stars]

:-D

[General 6 Stars]

Baron, We got 4 turns in now with your lower values for pieces. The lower fighters attack and defend do make a difference in all battles. Figs just not over powering.  We did have a naval battle in the Pacific with US and Japan with Japan winning do to bad dice rolling for US fighters. It was nice to see battles go longer with the lower Fig values.

As far as Oslo being one of the victory city’s in game will not be decided yet until there’s more test play. In this game Italy has full control of Africa but has to send more troops to Russia or Paris to help with Germany. If you look at pictures you can see where Germany is at.

We haven’t had any SBR’s yet to test the new rules with  factory’s AA gun getting defense reduced damage rolls.

We also had to change the turn weather chart some a bit do to being to strong for Germany early when it comes to winter.

The game is going great with the Tech ( after 4 turns only Germany has tech with Paratroopers ) chart, NA’s charts (2 per country), event cards (8 good, 8 bad cards per country ) , Generals, and the modified territory value changes and added Island icp’s.

Also want to thank Justin, Mark and Steve O for play testing this game with me.

[General 6 Stars]

Here’s the Charts I’m using for game also.

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

Baron, We got 4 turns in now with your lower values for pieces. The lower fighters attack and defend do make a difference in all battles. Figs just not over powering.  We did have a naval battle in the Pacific with US and Japan with Japan winning do to bad dice rolling for US fighters. It was nice to see battles go longer with the lower Fig values.
As far as Oslo being one of the victory city’s in game will not be decided yet until there’s more test play. In this game Italy has full control of Africa but has to send more troops to Russia or Paris to help with Germany. If you look at pictures you can see where Germany is at.

We haven’t had any SBR’s yet to test the new rules with  factory’s AA gun getting defense reduced damage rolls.

We also had to change the turn weather chart some a bit do to being to strong for Germany early when it comes to winter.

The game is going great with the Tech ( after 4 turns only Germany has tech with Paratroopers ) chart, NA’s charts (2 per country), event cards (8 good, 8 bad cards per country ) , Generals, and the modified territory value changes and added Island icp’s.

Also want to thank Justin, Mark and Steve O for play testing this game with me.

What a huge board!!!
Must be a real pleasure to play on that one.

About Fgs, I like it too that Fgs in Naval combat are chosen as casualty over warships and since Carriers provides 3 planes each, it makes plenty available as fodder. Usually on offense, Fighters are better fodder while on defense TcBs become the first choice. But it remains a tactical decision each combat round.
Gives a more realistic attrition of units in naval combat.

[General 6 Stars]

Thank You Baron. Yes its a great pleasure to play on big table and do have a little bit bigger table also for the 39 game.

When there is a naval battle with Fighters and ST Bombers and plane hits go to planes first, what are the Bombers attacking and defending at for values ? D12   A7 D2 ? Just to high for bombers. A2 D2 against Figs ?

Or bombers are not in plane attacks but still attack naval and then any left over figs hits go against bombers ?

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

Thank You Baron. Yes its a great pleasure to play on big table and do have a little bit bigger table also for the 39 game.

When there is a naval battle with Fighters and ST Bombers and plane hits go to planes first, what are the Bombers attacking and defending at for values ? D12   A7 D2 ? Just to high for bombers. A2 D2 against Figs ?

Or bombers are not in plane attacks but still attack naval and then any left over figs hits go against bombers ?

Since all is done in a same combat round, there is no different values when I play. I tried once for bombers, but it becomes too complex to change values according to remaining enemy’s unit.
So Fg A4 D4 M4-5 C7, hit planes first, then AAA
StB A8 D2 M6-7 C10

In Naval Combat, the owner’s choose which unit is taken as casualty.
So, if one prefer to loose Fg instead of a Destroyer, for example, that’s it.

That is the remaining weak point of my method.
Suppose 2 US DDs A4 D4 C8 in SZ and UK 4 Scrambled Fgs A4 D4 C7 against 4 German StBs A8 D2, defender may sacrifice cheaper UK Fighters and also because UK wanted to add a few warships and TPs in SZ next turn.
So, it may finish like 2 DDs survived while 1 StB retreated.
So 4 Fgs would have been destroyed against 3 StBs.
Not an interesting depiction of air battle. I only managed to think that somehow planes were bombed on airfield…

That’s an issue.
I’m open to ideas, it may help develop something better.

I thought about this, but still not satisfied, because it doesn’t solve the issue:
Heavy Strategic BOMBER Attack 8 AA2*
Defense 2
Move 6-7
Cost 12
*In regular combat, if any enemy’s aircraft, gets an additional Attack 2 against aircraft, each combat round.

I may want to split bombers attack in 2 specified attacks:

1. Against aircraft only: A2, if no target available, then no roll,
2. Against non-aircraft unit: A6, if no target available, then no roll.

What do you think?

[General 6 Stars]

I think that if you have any combat whether its on ground or naval all planes should have to have combat with planes on planes until one side wins the air.

You try were using the escort interceptor values but change them and make them higher ?
D12 values

Figs A4 D4
Stg Bomber A2 D2 ?  A1 D1 ?
Tac  A2 D2 ? A1 D1 ? Then they go back to regular values on naval and ground attacks.

Still think bombers are to high in value also. Did miss a lot. Stg B A6 D2  Tac A7 D4

Just think that if you want to bring bombers to a naval and ground battle they should have support but still have to survive the plane battles.

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

I think that if you have any combat whether its on ground or naval all planes should have to have combat with planes on planes until one side wins the air.
You try were using the escort interceptor values but change them and make them higher ?
D12 values

Figs A4 D4
Stg Bomber A2 D2
Tac  A2 D2

Just think that if you want to bring bombers to a naval battle they should have support but still have to survive the plane battles.

I don’t like this option because a combat round imply at least one flight and there is no historical absolute annihilation on either side.
Too unrealistic.
For example, in Midway, first US assault on IJN Carriers, all B-17 totally missed but none were killed, half TcBs (Torpedoes) were shooted down by Zero Fgs while other TcBs (Dive) hit their targets.

[General 6 Stars]

Do you mean when planes hit and missed there targets your talking about these hits and misses weren’t at other planes ?
The air plane battles would go on until just one side lives. Then what’s left can attack.
Maybe I’m missing it.

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

Do you mean when planes hit and missed there targets your talking about these hits and misses weren’t at other planes ? The air plane battles would go on until just one side lives. Then what’s left can attack.
Maybe I’m missing it.

Not exactly. I don’t want any"planes hit and miss, until just one side lives".
More realistic, Fighter hit planes first, in our Midway example it would be bombers whether TcB or StB. US player chose to loose a TcB unit.
But hits from bombers can be allocated to any naval or air units.

I thought about this, but still not satisfied, because it doesn’t solve totally the issue:
Heavy Strategic BOMBER
Attack 8 AA2*
Defense 2
Move 6-7
Cost 12
*In regular combat, if any enemy’s aircraft, gets an additional Attack 2 against aircraft, each combat round.

I may want to split bombers attack in 2 specified attacks:

1. Against aircraft only: A2, if no target available, then no roll,
2. Against non-aircraft unit: A6, if no target available, then no roll.

What do you think?

[General 6 Stars]

Ya I like the split Bomber attack. What do you think of these value changes ?

Stg Bomber A6 D2 C8 M6

Tac Bomber A7 D4 C9 M4  Pick target on hit.

Keep Hvy Bomber the same.

Will give the split Bomber attacks a go in game unless something comes up. I’m going to need to use something in game.

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

Ya I like the split Bomber attack. What do you think of these value changes ?

Stg Bomber A6 D2 C8 M6

Tac Bomber A7 D4 C9 M4  Pick target on hit.

Keep Hvy Bomber the same.

Will give the split Bomber attacks a go in game unless something comes up. I’m going to need to use something in game.

If you use split attack for Strategic bomber:

1. Against aircraft only: A2, if no target available, then no roll,
2. Against non-aircraft unit: A6, if no target available, then no roll.
   This means if both targets available, then each StB will rolls 2 dice, until either plane or non-aircraft no more available as target.

I don’t feel the same for TcBs, there is many kind of planes in this category.
I thought you put them A6 D4 M4-5 C8?

No need to rise to A7, since StB is now A6 against ground or naval unit but at least 2-3 IPCs costlier.
This keep TcB as the better cost effective attack plane.

And this keep TcB A6 C8 vs Fg D5 C7, acceptable odds.
Rising to 9 IPCs makes too costly for a full 3 planes Carrier and to feeble Carrier on defense: 3 TcB A21 C43 vs 3 Fgs D18 C37.

[General 6 Stars]

When I said I was going to use the split Bomber attack, I meant the attacker has to make a choice. Didn’t know you meant rolling 2 die.
So now if planes and ships are available to attack, the bomber now can hit a plane on a 2 and a ship on a 6.
You don’t think thats to strong a piece now ?

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

When I said I was going to use the split Bomber attack, I meant the attacker has to make a choice. Didn’t know you meant rolling 2 die.
So now if planes and ships are available to attack, the bomber now can hit a plane on a 2 and a ship on a 6.
You don’t think thats to strong a piece now ?

Why this is too strong?
In land combat, any defending fighter roll each combat round D5. If none, StB only gets A6 vs ground units.
In naval combat, if a defending player keep up its Fg and sacrifice her naval target, bombers only gets A2.

OOB, in D12 digit, StBomber have A8 D2 for C12. And A2+A6 = A8.

Compared to 2 Fgs A4 D5 C7, it gives A8 D10 for C14. 2 Fighters are already much dangerous on same IPC basis.

12 Fgs A4 D5 = A48 D60 C84 compared to 7 StBs A8 D2= A56 D14 C84
It gives (D6 digit): 7 StBs vs 12 DDs
Overall %*: A. survives: 15% D. survives: 83.4% No one survives: 1.6%

However, it is probably simpler to keep this principle:  a single roll per unit, each combat round.
So, from a testing POV, if using 1 roll per StB either A2 or A6, to keep balance, I would reduced to 10 IPCs.
But if you keep 12 IPCs, I suggest to try the double rolls StBs.

[General 6 Stars]

Want to make sure were on the same page with the piece values. I have in game now.

D12 values

Figs    A4 D4 M4 C6
Tac     A7 D4 M4 C8   Gets to pick the casualty hit.
Str B  A8 D2 M6 C10
H Bo  A8 D2 M7 C12  Gets 2 die rolls on SBR’s

I will change the Str Bomber to ( have to double check on setup sheet if I have this value in game now after work ) A6 D2 M6 C10 and has to decide if attacking a plane 1 roll A2 or attacking a non plane piece 1 roll A6.

Heavy Bomber keep the same values but gets to roll 1 A2 against plane and 1 roll A6 against a non plane piece.

Do you think the bombers cost should be lower with using the same values in above 2 sentences ?

Stg bomber  C8
H Stg B C10
Maybe you could do some numbers crunching ?

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

Want to make sure were on the same page with the piece values. I have in game now.

D12 values

Figs    A4 D4 M4 C6
Tac     A7 D4 M4 C8   Gets to pick the casualty hit.
Str B  A8 D2 M6 C10
H Bo  A8 D2 M7 C12  Gets 2 die rolls on SBR’s

I will change the Str Bomber to ( have to double check on setup sheet if I have this value in game now after work ) A6 D2 M6 C10 and has to decide if attacking a plane 1 roll A2 or attacking a non plane piece 1 roll A6.

Heavy Bomber keep the same values but gets to roll 1 A2 against plane and 1 roll A6 against a non plane piece.

Do you think the bombers cost should be lower with using the same values in above 2 sentences ?

Stg bomber  C8
H Stg B C10
Maybe you could do some numbers crunching ?

D12 values
AAA A0 D2 NCM1 C4, preemptive strike against up to two planes (1 roll max per plane) each combat round
Figs    A4 D4 M4 C7
Always hit enemy’s plane first (owner’s choice), then AAA,  then casualty as usual
Tac     A6 D4 M4 C8   Gets to pick the casualty hit.
Str B  A6A2 D2 M6 C10, up to you if both rolls or not
H Bo  A8A2 D2 M7 C12  Gets 2 die rolls on SBR’s
Heavy is heavy: will get both rolls and ground attack remains A8.
Need to balance with low cost Fg, too.
I would not get StB below 10 IPCs nor HStB below 12.
Because Dark Sky strategy becomes OP, too much range and attack, huge power projection.

Tac A7 C8 is high for the cost. And compared to Tank A6 D6 C6 M2 ?
Also Carrier loss defending stance Tac+Fg OOB A14 D18 C37. 2Fgs A12 D20 C36
Always keep better defense.
3 planes Carrier need to be close of this ratio. CV A0 D5? M2 C16
(My value: A0 D6 M2 C16, 2 hits with Fg A4 D4 C7 or reduced cost structure:
CV A0 D6 M2 C12, 2 hits with Fg A4 D4 C6   )
3FgsCV  A12 D18 C37, OOB cost structure SS6, DD8, CA12, CV16, BB20 or
3FgsCv  A12 D18 C30, at reduced cost structure SS5, DD6, CA9, CV12, BB15
3 TcBsCV A18 D18 C40, (attack is at best even to defense) OOB cost or C36 at reduced cost.

If you raise Tac to A7 C8, it becomes impossible to stay within parameters.
You get a totally different Carrier than any A&A game, better built for offense than defense…
Also, Tac  has a ground targeting capacity which is pretty amazing by itself. No need to rise A7.
And StB will have no niche for itself.

If you want to boost it further, try to add **targeting Capital warship at sea (**more thematic).
In Naval combat, Tac roll first and pick either a BB or Carrier if a hit is made, owner’s choice.
At first combat round, it will not matter but in future rounds this may reveal truly hard for the owner’s to make choice, as he will loose Capital warships.

[General 6 Stars]

OK, will go with these changes. Thank You for your time and replies.

I know we had AAA guns  C3 and Figs C6 but will change theses also to AAA C4 Figs C7.

I will also use the Stg Bomber values when there’s ground combat too. A2 at plane or A6 at non plane.
I’ll have Tacs do the same thing as a Stg Bomber. 1 roll Attacker choice A2 at a plane or A6 at non plane piece.

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

OK, will go with these changes. Thank You for your time and replies.

I know we had AAA guns  C3 and Figs C6 but will change theses also to AAA C4 Figs C7.

I will also use the Stg Bomber values when there’s ground combat too. A2 at plane or A6 at non plane.
I’ll have Tacs do the same thing as a Stg Bomber. 1 roll Attacker choice A2 at a plane or A6 at non plane piece.

Fine.
I still have doubt for mixing two rolls for TacBs. It is adding unnecessary complexity (game POV).
It was not historically accurate: many TcBs were able to dogfight, not all but many.
StBs and HStBs will be a case in themselves.

Fg A4 D4 against TcBs A6 D4.
On offense Fg A4 (hit Tac) vs TcB D4 (can only pick ground)
On defense Fg D4 (hit Tac) vs TcBs A6 (can only pick ground, not air) usually this make the case.

[General 6 Stars]

OK. Will go with these changes. I’ll hopefully get you some more results soon.

Thank You Baron.

[General 6 Stars]

Now with Oslo being a Germany victory city, we are trying a few things to not make Germany have to send to many troops to Norway to hold by land and pretty hard to send by transports.

So will put in game sea mines off the coast of Western France where Naval gets a -1 on attack the first round and planes -1 on land attacks for first round do to missing by 3 miles on first wave of landing.
Also will place 4 land mines in Western France for the Germans. When US-UK land there, they will lose 4 inf before battles.

Still testing this balance where I don’t want to add a IC in Norway.