@barnee Thanks for the replies, the CIS ones sound good, and I like the idea of Gibraltar actually being important in 1914. I might also give the Spanish objectives in North Africa to motivate them to spread out a bit more. Not quite sure what to do with China yet, but they will probably be with the Central Powers (I know they weren’t historically, but it balances the game better). I’m thinking maybe I will give them IPCs for capturing Korea and parts of south Asia.
National Advantages in AA50
-
Does anyone know if there has been any discussion of National Advantages being developed for the 50th Anniversary Edition? Is anyone developing some of their own? I really liked those. I wonder how the use of the AAR LHTR 2.0 National advantages would fare in this edition. US Chinese divisions would probably have to be replaced… and something might have to be done about UK Radar if you also want to use Weapons Develpment (perhaps it is just that UK gets that WD for free). Only problem is, they seemed to make the game imbalanced even more in favor of the Allies, and I’m afraid this edition might be suffering the same flaw of imbalance if the allies do their SBRs… but for me it’s too early to tell for that I think. Anyway… thoughts?
-
Well, in regards to SBR, this is probably the only edition of this game where SBR is not hopelessly broken in favor of the allies. Over the past 60 some odd games, I’ve found SBR to be a valuable tool for both the Axis and the Allies and the counter measures for SBR to be effective for both Axis and Allies (though harder for Italy to accomplish).
As far as national advantages go, honestly, with the double charts for technologies, I don’t see a strong need for it. I still call for Super Submarines to be replaced with Battleship Anti-Aircraft Guns or Reinforced Aircraft Carriers or even Improved Airfields (Fighters cost 8, bombers 10) or something.
-
what is SBR SuBmaRine?
-
@testguy:
what is SBR SuBmaRine?
Strategic
Bombing
Raids -
I prefer using the same ideas that could be assigned to any nation. This is IMO i more exact way to balance it out then to have each nation with its own unique NA’s
**Universal National Advantages: **
Procedure: roll D12 or select one NA per turn with each nation choosing a number of them equal to what was agreed by all players.
- Paratroopers: Each Bomber can now carry one infantry from the territory it started movement from to any friendly or enemy controlled territory. If dropped in hostile land zone the unit attacks at 2 and must fight to the death.
- Fast Warships: Carriers and Cruisers now move 3 sea zones.
- Blitzkrieg: Your Armor units moving one space in combat movement and successfully clearing the enemy land zone can perform either: A) attack a new enemy territory from the captured territory, or B) retreat to an adjacent territory during NCM and avoid possible enemy counterattack.
- Dug in Defenders: You infantry in originally controlled land territories surrounded by water defend at 3. Note: includes all small islands plus Japan, England and New Zealand, but not Australia.
- 5th Column: Convert one neutral per game in the future by rolling a D6= number of turns you wait before conversion (keep roll secret).
- Mechanized Infantry: You may freely replace one infantry with a mechanized infantry each turn.
- Manpower reserves: You may build infantry for 2 IPC for one turn in the game, but any infantry built after costs 4 IPC.
- Total War: you may elect to build one factory for free per game, or destroy one enemy factory, or move one factory to another originally controlled territory.
- Trained Pilots: your original fighters you start the game with attack at 4 for the rest of the game, but once each is destroyed, it cannot be replaced. (Write T on chip to designate them.
- Foreign Aid: one ally can loan another up to what you roll on a D6 each turn.
- Mobile Warfare: Your fighters attacking with Armor or Mechanized Infantry boost these units +1 each combat round at a matching 1/1 basis.
- Combined forces: Once per game you and one ally can make your turn together performing movement, combat and non-combat together. The player moving up does not buy or place new units, and he still gets his own turn, so it’s essentially a double movement and combat action. This would be in addition to the D-Day rule.
Historical Suggested starting NA’s:
Germany: Paratroopers, Blitzkrieg, 5th Column, Mechanized Infantry, Mobile Warfare, Total War.
England: Fast Warships, Trained Pilots, Foreign aid, combined forces.
Japan: Dug in Defenders, Trained Pilots
Soviet Union: Mechanized Infantry, Manpower reserves, Total War.
United States: Mechanized Infantry, Total War, Foreign Aid, Combined Forces.
Italy: nonenow if you insist on national (unique ideas) her is a list:
National Unit purchase changes:
• Germany: Can build one sub for 5 IPC per turn or 2 Infantry for 5 IPC.
• Soviets: Can build two tanks for 8 IPC once per turn or two Mechanized Infantry for 6 IPC each turn. Must be bought as a pair.
• Japan: They can build one fighter or Destroyer for two IPC less per turn.
• Italy: They can build two Infantry for 5 IPC.
• UK: They can build one Destroyer, Cruiser or fighter for 1 IPC less each turn.
• USA: They can build one Transport for two IPC less or two Mechanized Infantry for 6 IPC each turn. -
Historical Suggested starting NA’s:
Germany:Paratroopers, Blitzkrieg, 5th Column, Mechanized Infantry, Mobile Warfare, Total War.
England: Fast Warships, Trained Pilots, Foreign aid, combined forces.
Japan: Dug in Defenders, Trained Pilots
Soviet Union: Mechanized Infantry, Manpower reserves, Total War.
United States: Paratroopers, Mechanized Infantry, Total War, Foreign Aid, Combined Forces.
Italy: Dug-In DefendersMy additions are in bold, my eliminations are struck out.
Germany does not strike chords of “paratrooper” power in my mind when I think of it. America does, however, what with the 82nd Airborne and 101st Airborne coming readily to mind. (I know Germany had paratroopers, but can anyone name one without looking up the unit designation?)
Also, Italy (at least Italy itself) was very heavily fortified, the infantry there should defend at a three. Perhaps only on Italy itself, but it was one of the major reasons D-Day was planned, since going through the Alps was going to be a nightmare and a half.
-
I agree with Italy , but Germany had the best airborne in the war until it got wiped out fighting in Crete.
They were top notch commandos.
I will make the change for italy.
http://www.vnutz.com/content/airborne_heritage
Germany joined the airborne bandwagon first. The armistice from the first World War denied Germany the privilege of possessing an air force, however, neither gliders nor paratroopers were expressly forbidden. Germanany decided to convert a portion of their Luftwaffe pilots into paratroopers under the premise they were already accustomed to the air. The first parachute experiments began in June 1935 at a commercial flying school which was converted into an aerodrome. By January 1936, German experiments were complete and the Richtlinien fur die Aufstellung von Fallschirmjager Verbanden (Instructions on the Formation of Parachute Troops) was published.
America’s endeavors into developing airborne units were not serious until the second World War had already broken across Europe. The first American parachute platoon was synthesized at Ft. Benning by order of Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall in 1940. America’s volunteer test platoon developed its doctrine on the fly. Training procedures and apparatus, including the 250-foot towers, were derived from a captured German paratrooper manual. American paratroopers were required to be between eighteen and thirty-two years old, measure between sixty-six and seventy-four inches tall, and weigh no more than 185 pounds. Training consisted of parachute maintenance, gymnastic tumbling, calisthenics, canopy maneuvering, and live jumps. Despite developing an airborne program nearly a decade later than its European counterparts, America effectively gleaned the best aspects from other nation’s training doctrine and incorporated lessons learned from their mistakes in combat situations.
The first effective uses of airborne units in combat were German insertions during the Blitzkrieg. Debate exists over whether Germany actually deployed paratroopers over Poland in 1939 because of Adolf Hitler’s intent to keep the existence of his paratroopers secret. On the 9th of February 1940, German paratroopers made their first documented appearance seizing bridges and airfields in Denmark and Norway. Capturing the Belgian fort Eban Emael on the 10th of May 1940 marked the turning point for airborne units. Here, approximately seventy-seven Germans rode gliders undetected onto the fort’s rooftop and captured 1200 Belgian soldiers within a day’s time. Simultaneously, 400 more Germans silently seized bridges along the Albert Canal opening a passageway through Belgium for Germany’s thrust into France. Germany continued to use its airborne units for smaller, support operations until Crete. For eleven days between the 20th and 31st of May 1941, German gliderborne soldiers and paratroopers fought to take Crete. Although the invasion of Crete was a disaster of execution and coordination, 22,000 German soldiers eventually overpowered the 40,000 British forces. Capturing Crete represented the first time a target was taken solely by airborne units and the last time Germany employed large scale airborne operations in the second World War.
Training airborne soldiers in the United States developed almost to the letter from the German training program. America’s fledgling doctrine was born from captured documents and experience from test runs on training grounds. The best input came from analyzing the German technique in combat. From these early footsteps, General James M. Gavin further refined the American airborne doctrine by combining translated German and Soviet airborne documents into FM31-30, the definitive guide to American operations during the period. From practical implementation, America learned the paratrooper’s weaknesses, strengths, and strategy.
Proper employment of airborne units yields the highest probability of success. Germany’s initial dominance during the Blitzkrieg resulted from a superb mixture of paratroopers as supporting units to the main effort. During the early 1940’s, military doctrine did not include a defense against vertical envelopment and forces were taken by complete surprise. The Belgian fort Eban Emael, for instance, was modeled after the French Maginot line and constructed entirely to repel ground forces. The Wehrmacht used paratroopers primarily as shock troops to inflict heavy damage from within the objective itself and cause chaos and disruption. During this time, the main effort closed on the target to complete the operation. Paratroopers were also employed to seize airfields and bridges so that heavy artillery could be delivered by air or armored units could reinforce the infantry. Airborne units had the advantage of speed, stealth, and mobility working to their benefit.
These new units were not entirely the flawless gems they appeared to be. Accurate intelligence of an objective was next to impossible for airborne units to obtain. Their targets were typically those beyond the range of reconnoitering scouts, forcing many units to jump blind. Airborne forces are highly susceptible to interception before they reach the objective. Either the carrier crafts bearing the entire force could be brought down by anti-aircraft guns or the paratroopers themselves could be machine-gunned as they float down to the drop zone. Self-sufficiency is their greatest weakness. Once inserted, airborne units cannot be resupplied or reinforced unless the objective is secure, forcing them to estimate how much equipment they will require without overburdening themselves. These deficiencies were evident in the Crete operation. The German intelligence did not anticipate the size of the British defense, the Luftwaffe and paratroopers were viciously attacked by anti-aircraft batteries, and the soldiers, expecting equipment drops, were armed with only pistols and grenades.
-
Okay, I stand corrected on Germany.
I also think America should get them. America used their airborne heavily from what I understand. Wasn’t the entire German offensive during the Battle of the Bulge stopped by American airborne units?
-
-
yes your correct. here we have it:
Historical Suggested starting NA’s:
Germany: Paratroopers, Blitzkrieg, 5th Column, Mechanized Infantry, Mobile Warfare, Total War.
England: Fast Warships, Trained Pilots, Foreign aid, combined forces.
Japan: Dug in Defenders, Trained Pilots
Soviet Union: Mechanized Infantry, Manpower reserves, Total War.
United States: Mechanized Infantry, Total War, Foreign Aid, Combined Forces, Paratroopers
Italy: Dug in Defenders -
During WW2, Italy had a very large submarine fleet, they fought also in the Atlantic, starting from the base on Bordeaux.
Italy had also had the best navy commandoes, they were forg-men. Because my english isn’t good, I invite you to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decima_Flottiglia_MAS
Thank you.
-
@Cmdr:
Okay, I stand corrected on Germany.
I also think America should get them. America used their airborne heavily from what I understand. Wasn’t the entire German offensive during the Battle of the Bulge stopped by American airborne units?
wouldn’t say entirely…
-
@Cmdr:
Okay, I stand corrected on Germany.
I also think America should get them. America used their airborne heavily from what I understand. Wasn’t the entire German offensive during the Battle of the Bulge stopped by American airborne units?
Well Airborne will tell you yes and that they did not need Patton to relive them. But since they got there in trucks its a moot point really, and besides in 41 the US lacked them almost entirly, unlike the SU who had the worlds largest trained Airborne force.
Battle of the Bulge at Arrdennes was a German offensive campaign, I think you mean the book and movie “A Bridge Too Far” when the us and uk paratroopers attempted to secure bridges across holland to german border for monty’s advance.
-
You are correct Nickiow, I should have left your quote out as I responding to CJenn.
-
I think the Revised NA would be a better idea. Yes, a lot of tweaking would have to be done, but it’s doable.
I think a lot of the old NAs blend perfectly with the new game. Here are some examples:
1. Lend Lease lets USSR convert US and UK pieces to USSR pieces. This means you won’t loose IPCs when your allies try to help you.
2. Japan is now an “island” on the new board, which means Dug-In Defenders now apply. Didn’t it seem dumb in AAR that Japanese infantry would put up a better fight on Iceland or Greenland than Japan?
Examples of needed tweaks:
1. Siberian Railway would obviously be extended to include the two new territories.
2. The Atlantic Wall and Fortress Europe NA would be weakened if the wording “all gray territories” were kept as is. At least it should be extended to “all gray and brown territories”. Basically, German Infantry and Artillery get a bonus fighting in Italy, but Italian Infantry and Artillery don’t. It seems paradoxical, but that’s the way it happened. Germany fought to the teeth while Italy surrendered.
I don’t think Italy should get a national “advantage.” Really, was their anything special or unique about Italy in WWII to warrant a NA? Personally, I think no NAs add to Italy’s character. It’s small, poor, and has only 2 NOs. Yet, it’s probably my favorite. As the old saying goes, “Small is beautiful.”
Suggested Topics
