Strategic Rockets (v3)

[David '06]

@linkler I think this could be a better stat
V - 1 rocket
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech stage 1 and jet fighter stage 2
Cost $1
Range 3
Attack 1 D6 vs/ facilties
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 2
Moves via rail/ naval transport only
Can be intercepted/ shot down by AA

V - 2
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech (since that’s what its for)
Cost $3
Range 3
Attack 1 D6 vs/ facilties
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 2
Needs to be launched out of an airbase
Moves via rail/ naval transport only

[General 6 Stars]

@david-06 said in Strategic Rockets (v3):

@linkler I think this could be a better stat
V - 1 rocket
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech stage 1 and jet fighter stage 2
Cost $1
Range 3
Attack 1 D6 vs/ facilties
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 2
Moves via rail/ naval transport only
Can be intercepted/ shot down by AA

V - 2
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech (since that’s what its for)
Cost $3
Range 3
Attack 1 D6 vs/ facilties
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 2
Needs to be launched out of an airbase
Moves via rail/ naval transport only

V-2 should cost more and they can be launched from anywhere.

[Linkler]

@linkler how about this:
V - 1 rocket
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech
Cost $1
Range 3
Attack 1 D6 vs/ land zone IPP value
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 2
Moves via rail/ naval transport only
Can be intercepted/ shot down by AA
Can be strategically bombed destroyed after 2 points of damage no inherent AA

[Linkler]

@linkler
V - 2
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech and jet fighters
Cost $2
Range 4
Attack 1 D6 vs/ land zone IPP value +1 modifier
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 3
Moves 1
Cannot be intercepted
Can be strategically bombed
destroyed if more than 3 damage
No inherent AA

[David '06]

@linkler for the V-1 tech you should need is:

1.strategic rockets stage 2
2.jet fighters stage 2

the V-1 used a pulsejet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argus_As_014
also, I think that the V-1 should not be able to be strategically bombed because of its size

[Linkler]

@david-06
Hey thanks for collaborating with me on this!
The level 2 techs thing you said makes sense for like historical reasons I see that just I’m not sure about it for playability reasons because every time we play the Germans have those techs to level 2 by 1939 for sure and it’s pretty early for rockets to start showing up…

The Allies did strategically bomb the rocket sites in WW2 from what ive read unless I’m mistaken about that, pretty sure though

I didn’t know that the Germans launched the v-2 s off airfields I though they just fired them from out in the bush kind of thing… did they use airfields to launch the v-1s as well? Just thinking we could add a modifier or extra range if launched from an airfield or something

[General 6 Stars]

For a description of the V-2 launch equipment and procedure, see Meillerwagen.
Following Operation Crossbow bombing, initial plans for launching from the massive underground Watten, Wizernes and Sottevast bunkers or from fixed pads such as near the Château du Molay[44] were dropped in favour of mobile launching. Eight main storage dumps were planned and four had been completed by July 1944 (the one at Mery-sur-Oise was begun in August 1943 and completed by February 1944).[45] The missile could be launched practically anywhere, roads running through forests being a particular favourite. The system was so mobile and small that only one Meillerwagen was ever caught in action by Allied aircraft, during the Operation Bodenplatte attack on 1 January 1945[46] near Lochem by a USAAF 4th Fighter Group aircraft, although Raymond Baxter described flying over a site during a launch and his wingman firing at the missile without hitting it.

It was estimated that a sustained rate of 350 V-2s could be launched per week, with 100 per day at maximum effort, given sufficient supply of the rockets.[47]

[David '06]

@linkler Yeah it was fun. They did though launched V-1s from ramps
@GEN-MANSTEIN thanks for the info
I think that this should be the final results based on the commentary

V - 1 rocket
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech stage 1 and jet fighter stage 2
Cost $1
Range 3
Attack 1 D6 vs/ facilties
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 2
Moves via rail/ naval transport only
Can be intercepted/ shot down by AA

V - 2
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech
Cost $4
Range 3
Attack 1 D6 vs/ facilties
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 2
Moves via rail/ naval transport only

V - 1 rocket
Vehicle class
Single use
Req. strategic rockets tech stage 3 and jet fighter stage 4
Cost $2
Range 3
Attack 1 D6 vs/ facilties
Carpet bomb 1 D12 @ 2
Moves via rail/ naval transport only
Can be intercepted(but at a 2 for all fighters to stimulate that they can’t shot it down or it will explode)/ shot down by AA

[Delaja]

@david-06

Hi All,

As one of the designers of version 3, I can say that we deliberately set the damage-cost ratio higher, because in game play with the stats you propose, you could just invest in rockets to empty the capital of your enemies before attacking with land units. Whipe out London before entering for example. I would prefer a cost of 3, or 4 which makes it worth the buy versus 3,5 average damage in regular attacks, BUT in your calculations you are not adding in, the worth of all your income being used almost immediately against an important enemy target like the capital at the front each turn. Being able to suddenly bring a lot of units to the front with your full income is risky for the game balance. So the price needs to be higher. Rockets are a way of giving that extra punch where you desperately need it for strategical or tactical reasons. Because you want to take a certain land zone at any cost or because a certain land zone should produce as little units as possible or targeting other infrastructure to have your opponent invest in repairs. Limiting the number of builds per turn is a wise way to go. That would open up for lowering the price.
A) too low a price could potentially break the game
B) too high a price makes the units useless.
Under the conditions of the last post I read on this issue, I would say use a price of 4 or 5 if you can buy an unlimited amount of rockets to avoid overpowering them. Go lower if you limit the number of purchases of rockets. Find a balance that does not over- or underpower rockets. Looking forward to new calculations involving the extra dimension of reaching the front/enemy capital faster with rockets. 6 IPP was not my first choice, but 1 IPP is a game breaker if not limited.
With regards,
DSbb
HBG Designer of GW1936v3

[David '06]

@delaja Thanks for the info!

[Linkler]

@delaja

What about using rockets to target land zone ipps? It would be more realistic historically (I think) and something different as well. Since we can already bomb facilities with bombers and also the rockets of the day weren’t really able to target specific buildings or what have you- even carpet bombing units seams unlikely given the run-out-of-fuel-aiming system that they had.

If the rockets were cheap enough you could use them to target London for example for a max of 3 IPPs per calendar turn -

Possible +1 modifier to D6 roll for city zones?
Something like
“4 or 5 rolled (miss) no effect
“if 6 rolled (D6) defender applies damage to facility of his/her choice in zone being attacked”

V1s subject to AA and fighter interceptions

V2 being mobile and more expensive but with no way to shoot down

Any thoughts?

[Linkler]

@linkler

I’d propose V-1s are $1 IPP req strat rockets

V-2s $2 IPP req strat rockets/ and maybe improved construction instead of jet power? It does apply to more than just ships after all

Can build 1 of either per turn per major factory at major factory location.

Can be targeted by tactical bombers for 1 round ignoring all other land units present with no defence roll (unless AA and or fighters present to intercept)

[Delaja]

Rocket Technology
When I became a designer at HBG, a lot of rules were still inspired by good old Axis and Allies. Rocket technology was a technology in AA aimed at damaging factories. The V-series Germany built were not even rockets in definition.

V1 and V2 were very expensive projects and ineffective from a military point of view. If it was up to me, the impact of V1 and V2 would only have a historical role in the game if attacking facilities and cities and as part of the Ordnance expansion in combination with achieving rocket technology. Also including rules to prolong the game into the cold (or hot) war, with a new scenario and an advanced rocket technology. Rockets became advanced and effective post-WW2.
Rocket technology in WW2 GW should be redesigned to move away from the supersonic flying bombs (V-series were not rockets) to implementing pieces such as Katyusha’s and Nebelwerfers. All the rules I have seen so far do not address the V-effectiveness problem and overpower the V1 and V2.
So Rocket Tech could allow all the special rocket artillery pieces to be introduced into the game and V1 and V2 in my view should be expansion material. If you insist on using V-series make them cost 2 and 1 attack per turn per airbase range 2 (limited to 1 attack per airbase per land zone per turn. It would be an incentive for Germany to build airbases (representing the costs) on the Atlantic coast and possibly the Eastern front and get free shots at UK (and Soviet) facilities across the channel requiring Rocket technology.
Here are some house rules worked out to make things interesting. It requires some tweaking. See what you can use to spice up rockets technology.

ROCKETS TECHNOLOGY
Once a player achieves rocket technology, he may do attrition attacks. Any artillery unit may fire 1D12 at an adjacent land zone from a once, hitting on a 2 or less. Advanced artillery would hit on a 3 or less. If opting for attrition attacks, the artillery unit is not allowed to make a regular attack. Defenders can make no defense rolls against an attrition attack.

Example: Germany has 4 artillery at the gates of Leningrad. USSR is dug in deep and Germany waits for more reinforcements to make an attempt to capture the city later in the game. Germany decides to make an attrition attack with the idle artillery units bordering Leningrad and rolls 4D12; outcome: 1, 2, 7, 7. Two first strike attrition hits are scored (1, 2) and two misses. The Soviet player removes 2 casualties of his choosing. (Mind that attrition attacks can be combined with regular attacks to soften up the defensive force. The attrition attack would be rolled before the regular attack commences.

Katyusha, Nebelwerfer
A:5(3*); D:4, M:2, C:5

First strike ability
Available after acquiring Rocket technology.
Purchase maximum 2 per turn.
No river Attack penalty.
*Attrition Attack adjacent land zone “3”.

Operation Overlord
Starting January 1944 the Allied player(s) may once per game decide to do Operation Overlord. Assign UK and French pieces in and bordering London during their respective turns to be used in the US turn for an attack on any one (1) land zone that is part of the Atlantic Wall; Denmark-Aquitaine. These units assigned to Operation Overlord may not attack/move during the UK/French turns, but postpone their CM until the start of the US CM. Naturally in the US NCM any UK/French aircraft that survived are able to land.

I am not posting these as official HBG rules, but as a player like you guys looking to improve the game where possible by house ruling.

[Linkler]

@delaja Any thoughts on this? Also I like your nebelwefer/katushka idea but we need units for each team to implement that right m?
Here’s where I’m at with this now:

Vengeance Weapon Expansion (or amendment to present rules)

V-1
Requires Strategic Rockets
Cost $1 IPP
Vehicle Class
Range 2
Moves by rail/ naval transport

Can build 1 rocket (of either kind) per factory at factory location per turn.

Can be targeted by tactical bombers for 1 round ignoring all other land units present with no defence roll (unless AA and/or fighters present to intercept)

Can be transported/launched from submarines (req. advanced submarine technology)

Can be transported/launched from medium, strategic and heavy bombers

Procedure:

1. Attacker selects land zone and facility (if applicable) to target
2. V-1 is subject to AA fire (if present) and fighter interception
   (Not early war fighters) if fighter interceptor rolls a “12” rocket and fighter are immediately destroyed
3. If Rocket survives attacker rolls a D6
   “1, 2, 3,”  hits land zone defender immediately loses that amount of IPPs (cannot lose more that land zone IPP value per zone per calendar turn)
   “4,5” miss (no effect)
   “6” hit, roll defender facility AA (if applicable) if rocket survives roll D6 again for damage

V- 2

Same as V-1 except:
Also req. Advanced Construction
Cost $2
Moves 1
Cannot be intercepted or shot down by AA

Any thoughts/ideas/questions ?

[David '06]

@linkler I like the Idea but I’m not so sure about the launching from planes. Same for the subs except that would be really cool (kind of a cold war twist). I would like to add on to that combining B-29 going nuclear by these text

long-range nuclear rocket
requires nuclear tech, and rocket tech and nuclear reactor to build
attack: 2 D12 carpet bombing at an 8 or lower (4D12 in cities) with a D6 amount of damage to the area to the IPP value (cannot lose more that land zone IPP value per zone per calendar turn)
Range 6
Moves by rail/ naval transport
Cost: 8 IPPs with 2 uranium and 2 heavy water

sub launched nuclear rocket
requires nuclear tech, and rocket tech and nuclear reactor to build
attack: 2 D12 carpet bombing at an 8 or lower with a D6 amount of damage using the same procedure that the V-2 uses
Range 3
Moves by rail/ naval transport
Can be transported/launched from submarines (req. advanced submarine technology(1 rocket per sub))
Cost: 4 IPPs with 1 uranium and 1 heavy water

[Linkler]

@david-06
-Lots of V1s were launched from planes in WW2 mainly the Germans used Heinkels and the FW 200 from what I’ve read
-none were actually launched from subs but the tech was there Hitler wanted to bomb the US with them

[David '06]

@linkler thanks I didn’t know that.