Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

SBR's as NA's?

House Rules

943

F

Feldmarshall Hartmann
last edited by Sep 17, 2005, 6:49 AM

I was unable to sleep tonight and suddently an idea came to my mind. I don’t think the game truly reflects the importance of SBR’s. Superfortresses were primarily designed for strategic bombardment, not tactical battles as we always use them in the game (or do we….hummm?)

So, I thought of the following rule:

Strategic bombing raids
The mighty 8th air force conducted tousands of sorties against German industry throughout the war, inflicting considerable losses to the Reich’s economy.
For every bomber present on the United Kingdom territory, the German player must surrender 2 IPC’s from his money to the bank at the begining of his turn. This rule is similar to the “U boote interdiction” rule. Bombers can conduct tactical battles as normally but they must land on UK territory for the rule to take effect on the next turn.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0

Featured Topics

League rules idea: mulligans for patrons

Guadalcanal Tournament at Strategicon (Los Angeles) Feb. 17, 2024

T-shirts, Hats, and More

global 1940

177

anniversary

1914

1942 2nd ed

tips&tricks

bm3

video

axis & allies

Suggested Topics

I

Oztea's Global 1941 Setup - Germany Play the Med?

House Rules
• • Jun 5, 2017, 9:15 PM • Ichabod Jun 8, 2017, 4:06 PM

5

0
Votes

5
Posts

1.4k
Views

I Jun 8, 2017, 4:06 PM

taamvan,

Excellent analysis on the differences between G40/G42 vs Oztea’s 41. I think in some ways, the 41 setup has “almost” fully realized the potential of the Global board. I like how it initially looks. It makes think of coming into a high level situation brief on in-progress ops. I imagine a table top board would seem very busy at first (I’ve only seen it on triplea, even there it’s cluttered). But like all axis and allies board games, they clean up real quick along the frontiers. Â

I did notice how this setup forces the Axis to stick to realistic solid objectives; but dangles out some “mirages” like Cairo. Â I’m of the opposite opinion. I think I’d even evacuate the german tank and 1 infantry on turn 1. Rarely I see people really invest in Cairo and going for the middle east, but on the forums some people talk about it. I’m never good at that.

I don’t know which way the game leans axis or allies. I’ll have to play it out a few more times before I’ll have a definite opinion. Do you remember which sides won at your club? Regardless, it seems very balanced and the US could get real aggressive anywhere it wants immediately. The US does start out with an Army, but Germany has a sizeable European garrison for defense and a nice navy in the Baltic for reinforcing Finland. Russia starts with a destroyer/sub combo in the artic, so they have a chance to kill a german sub in sz 125 and can therefore almost be guaranteed to collect their 5 IPC bonus for a few turns. Also, over time, the allies gain a few more IPCs as the French territories get occupied by allies. Russia might be tempted to stack it’s much larger mobile army at Amur on round 2, but I think it better to move it to Europe.
Y

Grasshopper's Production & Bombing System

House Rules
• • Dec 18, 2015, 7:44 AM • Young Grasshopper Dec 31, 2015, 6:13 PM

8

0
Votes

8
Posts

1.5k
Views

A Dec 31, 2015, 6:13 PM

So if, as germany,after I capture Moscow which had 2 damaged ICs and 2 good ICs.Is the 1 IC that remains after capture a good 1 or a damaged one?
I can imagine Russia leaving a "scorched earth"or Germany being able to find enough infastructure for an operational minor IC remaining.
A

Argo's Strategic Map

House Rules
• • Jul 31, 2015, 8:28 PM • Argothair Aug 19, 2015, 3:30 AM

46

0
Votes

46
Posts

9.2k
Views

P Aug 19, 2015, 3:30 AM

@Black_Elk:

That’s a clean map Ryuzaki_Lawlie!

The color selection is ideal. Though the black impassibles still jump out at me

From a design standpoint the only things that catch my eye are the two round sea zones surrounding Japan and Hawaii.

It feel like you need one in the Atlantic to balance things out aesthetically. Have you considered the possibility of one surrounding the British Isles?

Or maybe Iceland? Or maybe both?

I still think Mercator is a bit tight in Europe, a little stretching there might be ideal, even if it was just along the vertical axis. I think the map would still read fine, but you’d get a few more pixel for units into those key European spots. Also if you were willing to shrink South America slightly you could almost curve off a 10th of the map height at the bottom of the screen (which is notorious for players forgetting units in the south sea hehe) without really needing to change Africa/Australia of the pacific. Basically a slight bend would go a long way, even if using Mercator for the baseline.

Oh and I think the possession colors for Dutch Borneo and British Sarawak and North Borneo should be reversed.

My only suggestions :)

Nice work man. That would be a fun map to form the basis of a 1939 game, or any year from 39 on.

I like that you have not yet imposed on the map any extraneous information such as IPC values or VC. This means the map is adaptive for many purposes. I like the general division of territories. Only that the projection is a bit large at the poles for my tastes. If we could shrink them up slightly I think the map would be ideal. Its really more about screen dimension for me when it comes to the Big World Map that Wandering Head made. These days most screens are very long relative to their height, so standard Mercator always seems blown out a bit in tripleA to me, especially at the south end, and of course Europe is always tight. I wish the center picker for tripleA was better at housing units to smaller scales. Its a little better than it used to be, especially with the guiding lines, but still Europe loves to clutter up haha.
:-D

Again though, great design direction!

I’ll probably shift the continents (turning their general direction), and stretch out northern Africa and Europe, will probably require North America to get a bit skinny, but I think the big benefit from this, is that potentially more European spaces can be added. This will allow me to add more to the Mediterranean however (and it really needs the space), perhaps round out where Rome is. Africa, I think needs a bit more work. South America possibly as well, but I sort of need an idea of which cities can be considered major not only there, but elsewhere. Vladivostok will defiantly get added in with it’s own space.

I picked black for impassables, since it tells me that there is nothing there, no play space, it’s simply temporary, and they are there for the designer’s benefit.

I’m not sure where else to put a rounded Sea Zone, I’m considering more though.
I

Ozeta's 1941 setup

House Rules
• • Mar 31, 2011, 10:57 PM • Idi Amin Apr 18, 2011, 2:04 PM

16

0
Votes

16
Posts

2.6k
Views

H Apr 18, 2011, 2:04 PM

@oztea:

whoops, i meant january-febuary 194_3_

which means the 42 setup is going to have to back track

im all befuddled now

The operation you described (Manstein’s attempt to break the entrapment of the 6th Army at Stalingrad) actually took place in December 1942. If you’re looking into 1943 then you’d have the 3rd Battle of Kharkov (the Germans taking the territory of Rostov) on Feb or even Kursk, although that’s by late summer 1943.
M

Adding Weapons Developments to Pacific '40

House Rules
• • May 4, 2010, 1:41 PM • Make_It_Round May 29, 2010, 4:07 PM

8

0
Votes

8
Posts

1.3k
Views

M May 29, 2010, 4:07 PM

@crusaderiv:

For japan, you can add Chemical weapon.

Japanese used gas and chemical weapon against chinese forces during world war II.

Hi crusadriv,

Maybe I wasn’t being clear. What I’m proposing isn’t making new weapons developments, but taking the existing weapons developments that we know about from the upcoming Global '40 game and preemptively retrofitting them into the Pacific '40 game. That probably still sounds confusing… Ah well.

-MIR
P

Variable NO's…An AA50 variant

House Rules
• • Oct 22, 2008, 5:12 PM • Perry Oct 22, 2008, 5:12 PM

1

0
Votes

1
Posts

829
Views

P Oct 22, 2008, 5:12 PM

I got to say that the introduction of the National Objectives concept, was a stroke of genius imho.
Now, the game, through the NO Bonus Incentives, push the players towards their historical aims.

Anyhow, as with any setup, I think that even with the NO setup, AA50 might go stale over time.
Also, not ALL historical strategies are being encouraged by the OOB NOs. What about the German Sub strat, for example? It is not shown in any NOs at least.

Therefore, I thought of the Variable NO concept. It runs like this :

We create a list of, say, 5-10 NO’s per Nation (not possible to create even THAT many for a nation like China, for example). Before the game starts, every nation rolls randomly to see what NO’s they get.

1 NO: China
2 NO’s each: Italy and Soviet Union
3 NO’s each: Germany, Japan, UK and US

I like the thought of China having their own NO/NOs, but of course, they could be incorporated into the US one.

What’s your thought? Or maybe you got some NO’s of your own?
A

Combining SPI's ETO with A&A

House Rules
• • Sep 18, 2007, 5:04 PM • Admiral_Thrawn Sep 26, 2007, 11:09 PM

18

0
Votes

18
Posts

2.9k
Views

N Sep 26, 2007, 11:09 PM

Well that explains that. I wish there was some really easy way to create a good hex map. Have not found out how to do that yet.
M

Here's an idea of mine.

House Rules
• • Jan 27, 2003, 9:27 PM • MajorC Feb 20, 2003, 4:01 AM

9

0
Votes

9
Posts

2.7k
Views

X Feb 20, 2003, 4:01 AM

When you post something and realize it doesn’t belong delete it if you are a registered user!

THANKS!

29

Online

17.6k

Users

40.2k

Topics

1.7m

Posts