New concepts for Global 39 or 40.
Land units should move double if they choose to move in MCM. A Tank can move 4 if it does it in NCM
Air units ( making it KISS) should also be limited to 1/2 movement in combat ( 2 spaces) and in NCM (4 spaces).
Naval need this even more. Double movement in NCM. Too many sea zones. To move from europe map to pacific in global 1940 it will take all day. IN my Global 39 maintain the current naval movement because the sea zones are based on AA50.
Also:
Airborne units should be standard ( not technology) and forced to start from airbase, rather than any area. Air bases should be able to get attacked alone by planes and defend before 1st round with AA guns. So you can fight the enemy air force and just fight them using the unit values. If you attack a territory with an air base the air units defending should have the option to either:
Naval bases: Should protect against naval attacks, but not against air attacks or submarines. AA gun fires first, then normal combat. If you locate a port it also protects that coastline from invasion. In order to invade you need to take out the fleet with subs or combination of planes and subs. Attacking subs under this form of combat should be at 1 rather than 2 to represent smaller midget style craft entering harbor and evading the anti-sub net.
This will protect fleets and give the nations like Italy a more historical role in the game. This will make Malta more useful as well. lastly, it completely removes all ideas of wiping out entire navy’s in one turn and having to constantly deal with these threats.
The movement bonus out of an air base or naval port in combat movement is removed. It creates too much confusion anyway and the real intent of these installations is now restored to a realistic standing and value to historical modeling.
do aircraft still scramble?
Yes. against SBR
So on a island with an air base they cant scramble to defend the sea zone.
OK yes on that too. Just drop the extra movement thing. It offers nothing to the game.
if their is no radar, fighters should be able to suprize attack air bases and naval bases like in pearl harbor. roll dice: 4-6 defending fighters go up. roll 1-3 SUPRIZE ATTACK defending fighters are caught on ground cannot return fire for 1st round combat. if you have radar tech, no suprize attack option. whaddya think? :?
if their is no radar, fighters should be able to suprize attack air bases and naval bases like in pearl harbor. roll dice: 4-6 defending fighters go up. roll 1-3 SUPRIZE ATTACK defending fighters are caught on ground cannot return fire for 1st round combat. if you have radar tech, no suprize attack option. whaddya think? huh
Well under this idea they can attack air bases and not have to fight non air units. They just have to get thru AA guns and then the usual defensive rolls.
Under an expansion of this idea to integrate it with a proper technology which might be Radar, it makes sence. 1-3 surprise, 4-6 normal and all air is preemptive attacking rolls first round.
So yes. Good catch.
exellent! i really like your concept of different movement values for combat and non combat movment. its so much more realistic and makes good sense. i guess infantry is out on this one. tried to apply it and couldnt make it make sense.
Sounds good, I i like the land and sea movement idea.
So a fighter can move 2 in combat(to there target) and 4 in the non-combat.
I dont understand the idea for airbases. the rules already allow for air-air battles if you are SBing an air base. I would just add that tac bombers can SB air and naval bases and particpate in intercpetor/escourt combat.
I dont understand the naval base suggesting either. Does the AA gun fire at ships or planes? how does it portect fleets from naval attack?
i think NBs shelter ships from attack by other ships. but does not protect ships from any aircraft. in fact ships should be more vulnerable to planes, just like Pearl harbor. AA guns always fire. maybe ships if you play with separate AA for ships. tac bombers, dive bombers, torpedeo bombers whatever you want to call them get attack bonus against ships in port.
I don’t understand the idea for airbases. the rules already allow for air-air battles if you are SBing an air base. I would just add that tac bombers can SB air and naval bases and participate in interceptor/escort combat.
Airbases:
Procedure:
A) AA guns fire if located in territory
B) Attacking planes fire using normal values
C) Defending planes fire using normal values
Further rules optional:
Surprise Attacks:
Surprise attack is possible if you don’t have radar technology ( added and replace with one of the joke OOB techs)
1-3 Attacking planes get preemptive fire first round ( if units get hit, survivors still get to fire back)
4-6 Has no effect
I don’t understand the naval base suggesting either. Does the AA gun fire at ships or planes? how does it protect fleets from naval attack?
On land its the same idea:
All land units move double if you choose to move them in NCM.
Again i appeal to the possibility to include the ‘surprise attack option’ against Naval ports as well. It now really models all the historical realities and helps the game play quicker.
I don’t advise this rule for AA42 or AA50 and really only for AAP40/ AAE40 and Global 40
2)
i think NBs shelter ships from attack by other ships. but does not protect ships from any aircraft. in fact ships should be more vulnerable to planes, just like Pearl harbor. AA guns always fire. maybe ships if you play with separate AA for ships. tac bombers, dive bombers, torpedeo bombers whatever you want to call them get attack bonus against ships in port.
Thats right thats exactly the idea here. Protect ships from naval attacks, but not air attacks.
Also, make the air bases more viable against land combat ( before they did nothing except help against ships passing into the sea zone adjacent from the island air base.
Your on the right track. play it out in your next game. This is defiantly KISS
What about having Aircraft only be able to land at airbases, factories or carriers. Also, transports can only load units from a territory with a naval base or factory. This would make building and protecting factories,airbases and naval bases much more important. :-o
What about having Aircraft only be able to land at airbases, factories or carriers. Also, transports can only load units from a territory with a naval base or factory. This would make building and protecting factories,airbases and naval bases much more important. shocked
Kinda limiting. If you lost your last AB you cant fly planes? Well according this this you would not have any planes, except if Germany used Italian bases.
The idea of German planes that cant land in Germany but must land in Italy because they don’t have air bases makes no sence.
My idea gives some benefits and drawbacks to using them. If you are weak in air force you wont be using airborne, but if you make it strong you got a good defensive advantage as well as movement.
If you look at nations with small air forces it somehow mirrors their capabilities, but always keeps the potential alive allowing a player to get the advantage if it suits him.
Also, if you don’t buy AB i can see how it can be an advantage because now you got the land units protecting the air planes…. this is a draw back to my system. So perhaps i can give them the 4 NCM only if they move from an AB?
After more playtesting I find this:
Naval port rules as outlined are perfect
Air base rules have issue which is this: Player with weak air forces will not use the air base because the stronger air forces can create kill squadrons. They will opt out of the defensive advantage of being able to scramble to adjacent territories and instead use the other units to help them defend from unilateral attacks.
The solution is this-
AS the other poster pointed out rightfully the air base should be a requirement to use fighters as offensive pieces in the combat move, but not on defense.
Second, this form of air attacks ( against air bases from planes only) will use the same combat values as SBR escort/ interception rules.
All Attacking bombers at 3, Fighters and Tactical Bombers are at 1, all Defending planes ( of any type) are at 2.
So again the air base allows this:
Is this good?
Does the cost of these need to drop to say 8 IPC?
@Imperious:
Does the cost of these need to drop to say 8 IPC?
I was thinking 5 ipc so they are not cost prohibitive, we want players to build and use airbases right? But, you need to spend an extra 5 ipcs to upgrade them to accept bombers. This would work especially well on pacific islands.
AAGGGHHHH!! screwed up that post, dont feel like rewriting, you get the idea sorry made my post look like your quote.
OK air base =5, naval base = 10? or 8?, or 12?
Need to playtest.
Naval probably need 10, or perhaps 6 for AB and 12 for NB?
do you agree with 5 ipc upgrade of AB to accept bombers?
I don’t see the realism in having an AB for fighters and paying extra to get bombers. It seems like splitting hairs. Rather one price for AB and another for NB
6 and 12 seem decent.
