AA50: House Rules

[Imperious Leader]

They constitute a nice bridge between more complex wargames and A&A.

trying to bridge the gap with something with more teeth for people to chew.

currently we are working on a 4.1 which will be a dressed down version

[Jennifer]

I am thinking, wouldn’t it be nice to reward players for buying destroyers for their transports?

Perhaps a Destroyer paired with one or two transports should defend at a 3 or less?

[Imperious Leader]

Why would the destroyer get so powerful if it now has the burden of defending countless unarmed escorts on the high seas?

I am working on a new idea for a few days now…

Light cruisers!

3-2 unit also works like a destroyer with subs (negates the first strike) and costs 10 IPC

also considered escorts, which would be 1-2 units costing 6…perfect defenders for convoy.

[Jennifer]

Well, it isn’t really “so powerful” because we are just restoring it to the defense value it had in AAR.

What I am thinking is that a destroyer + 1 or 2 transports (not sure how many would be required to up it’s defense rate, I am leaning towards 2) would be acting as a convoy escort.  So you are not really rolling the destroyer’s defense, you are rolling the entire convoy’s organized defense (the destroyer AND the transports acting in concert.)

Meanwhile, of course, transports without a destroyer telling them what to do and organizing them, would be hopelessly lost. (0 defense.)

And destroyers without the added firepower from the transports (and they had SOME firepower, not great firepower, but they did have a gun I believe) wouldn’t have the added fields of fire and would fight at a reduced defense power. (2 or less.)

Notice, this is only their defense!  Attack would still be 2 or less.  Though, I’d be open to a suggestion it should be lowered to attacking at 1 regardless of what ships are with it!

[Emperor_Taiki]

Lower the destroyers attack to 1 and bring on light cruisers

then cruisers should be renamed heavy crusiers and light cruisers can not shore bombard

also should all crusiers movement be increased to 3 as well as carriers, they were faster than battleships and stuff

[Emperor_Taiki]

I thing escort ships are to small to be part of the axis and allies fleet

but what about escort carriers

cost 9 or 10 move 2 or 3 attack 0 defend 1 or 2, can carrier 1 fighter

they would be good in the atlantic for defending, while the fleet carriers would still be good in the pacific for their greater long range firepower

[Imperious Leader]

Also, i don’t like the spy rules. I have played East&West, and they make a little more sense during the cold war, but even there they feel pretty stupid and don’t really add anything to the game

yes but the spy thing adds alot of the war plots involving:

Soviet Spy get our A-bomb technology

German agents operating in America

Russian agents in Germany

its basically something like another way to buy a technology… by taking the secret from your ememy. I will remind you a little of that ninja rules from MB Shogun. Just try it.

I don’t favor escorts anymore, but a light cruiser with no SB at 2-3

making the cruiser now a heavy cruiser, but i am not sure they should move 3, even if it would be my typical suggestion in the past.

I don’t like the idea of changing the values of OOB units because it disrupts the others. I think it should cost 10 IPC, which fits in Italys budget and makes a good defender.

[Emperor_Taiki]

what about escourt carriers?

[Imperious Leader]

oh jeep carriers….

0-1 move 2, carry one fighter, cost 10?

[Jennifer]

@Emperor_Taiki:

what about escourt carriers?

Encompassed in giving Destroyers a boost in defense when coupled with transports.

Basically, Transports (2) + Destroyer = Fleet Convoy (Destroyers, Escorts, Escort Carriers, Fighters with Sonar to hunt down submarines, etc.)

[Bardoly]

Weaker Escort Carriers for 10 which can only hold 1 Fighter?  Why would anyone every buy them?

What the game really needs for naval warfare is a cheap “fodder” piece to defend against air fleets since the Sub can no longer be used as fodder and Bombers are cheaper.

That said, I would agree with making destroyers a 1 on attack and a 1 or 2 on defense for 5 or 6 IPCs.  This would allow you to have the Light Cruiser piece.

If one doesn’t want to alter the OOB pieces, then add an escort destroyer with a 1 on attack and a 1 on defense for 5 IPCs.

[Jennifer]

We have a cheap fodder piece against air units.  The Destroyer.  It’s the submarine of AA50.

Perhaps the escort carriers could cost 8 IPC, Att 0, Def 1, Carry 1 Fighter, Move 2.

[Imperious Leader]

The solution is not to change the OOB pieces values. These were created and fit into a system whereby the alteration of one value may have an undesired effect on others. The only thing is to invent pieces inside of the current values.

Escort carrier is a decent idea, but since the real carrier is 14 IPC, perhaps 8 ipc will be great for a 0-1-2 unit with 1 fighter

Light cruiser would be a 2-3 unit moving 2 and a 1 @ SB,  costing 10 IPC

Now we have two other units:

Mechanized Infantry:
2-2-2-4 unit can carry one inf or art one extra space at 1:1 basis

Fighter-Bomber:
3-2 unit costing 8 that SBR @ 1/2 rate

Fighter interceptors:
2-3 unit costing 8 that can immediately assist any adjacent attacked territory on the defense ( using its 3 value)

Heavy or Elite Armor:
4-5-2 unit costing 8. you can only build one per turn.

[Jennifer]

Can’t have mechanized infantry, it’s a technology.

I’d replace that idea with Commandos:

Call them marines, commandos, stormtroopers, whatever.

Idea:

Cost 4
Attack: 2
Special Attack: 3 First Round of Amphibious Assault
Defend: 1
Move: 1

With technology they could move 2 when coupled with an Armor (Mechanized Infantry)

Treated like Infantry in regards to Paratroopers and Transports.

[Emperor_Taiki]

@Cmdr:

Can’t have mechanized infantry, it’s a technology.

Well that depends on how much is going to be changed, is their going to be a whole new tech chart?
having a mechanized infantry peice i think adds alot, but i think tech changes should be agreed upon before changing other things,

also, commandos are such a small scale unit, you could argue marine corp, SS, or Guard units should be in the game but not commandos/rangers

[Jennifer]

I was reaching for names.  That’s why I said we could call them Marines, Commandos, Stormtroopers, your SS, Russian Bears, whatever.

I’m gunna start putting together a beta AA50e (enhanced) this weekend, maybe even finish it off tomorrow.

[Imperious Leader]

Well for starters this thread has already outlined the new techs. Thats why you see some of the national advantages indicating such things as paratroopers.

I have playtested my rules and its really fun option

Also i have a new idea:

Battlecruisers are a better choice than light cruisers ( use the Milton Bradley battleships)

This is …drum roll… a 4-4 unit but takes just one hit to sink!  I know this is brilliant!

So forget the light cruisers…these new units could represent pocket battleships, and older battleships.

I suggest the starting German Cruiser in 41 and 42 is this Battlecruiser.  I suggest the cost be at 14 IPC and it can shore bombard at 4.

[Bardoly]

@Cmdr:

We have a cheap fodder piece against air units.  The Destroyer.  It’s the submarine of AA50.

Perhaps the escort carriers could cost 8 IPC, Att 0, Def 1, Carry 1 Fighter, Move 2.

I’m sorry, but with the cheaper Bombers (which I do like), Transports which can’t soak hits, AND the fact that an air force attack against a naval force can’t hit Subs, the air wins every time (as far as IPCs are concerned) against the nerfed navy.  Yes, naval units are cheaper, but basically in every AA50 game which my group has played, the navys of the world have been gobbled up by air units.  (Yes we do play with techs, so Long Range, Jet Fighters, and Heavy Bombers all helped in this destruction.)  So, either unit costs should be lowered a little more, or if we want to keep the OOB units as they are, then just add a cheap “fodder” unit.

I agree that if you have the escort carriers, 7-8 IPCs is much more realistic than 10.

I also like IL’s Pocket Battleship/Battlecruiser idea.

[Imperious Leader]

Escort carrier:
is 8 ipc and 0-1-2 unit with 1 fighter capacity

Battlecruiser/Pocket Battleship:
Would be a 4-4 unit moving 2 and a 4 @ SB,  costing 14 IPC, takes 1 hit.

Mechanized Infantry:
2-2-2-4 unit can carry one inf or art one extra space at 1:1 basis

Fighter-Bomber:
3-2 unit costing 8 that SBR @ 1/2 rate

Fighter interceptors:
2-3 unit costing 8 that can immediately assist any adjacent attacked territory on the defense ( using its 3 value)

Heavy or Elite Armor:
4-5-2 unit costing 8. you can only build one per turn.

Commandos or elite infantry are a (3)- first round 2-2 unit. These move 4 spaces and this may include up to one water space. They attack to the death and can allocate unused movement points left over to “run away”  they cost 8 IPC
Note: these can be sent to attack naval targets as well ( think Italian frogmen or British at St. Nazaire)

Elite infantry idea #2: Representing Shock troops, Waffen SS, Guards
2-3 unit cost 4 move 1, can be boosted like infantry with artillery at 1:1 basis.

Generals:

Each nation has one general ( or perhaps more including admirals)

the General (or admiral) allows one re roll in combat for a miss each round.

[Emperor_Taiki]

I think we have to come up with a good name and idea for elite infantry if their going to be in the game because Elite armor would already represent most of what is Shock/Guard/Waffen SS is

also, IL are you playtesting these rules with the AARHE combat rules and turn/phase order or just what you have posted on this topic?

Cmdr Jennifer, AA50e beta sounds great cant wait!