G40 Enhanced begins. All are welcome.

[baron Münchhausen]

About 5. Enhanced air combat and scramble effect,
I have a different and simpler game mechanic to suggest which give almost the same statistical result.

Fighter A2D3M4C8, hit plane when roll “1” on first round.
In addition: on defense, roll 1@1 preemptive like AA.

TacBomber A3-4D3M4C10, hit plane when roll “1” on first round, get +1A when paired to Fg or Arm (as OOB).

StratBomber A4D1M6C12, can SBR.

Before the battle, all AAA defend up to 3@1 vs plane, max 1 roll/plane as OOB.

In addition, every defending fighter roll 1@1 vs plane.

All casualties are removed.

Then, all units (except AAA, which can only take hit, as OOB, /or as your rule said get D1) are part of the following battle including the previous defending fighters.

Every “1” rolled by Fg or TcB from either side is noted as a hit against the other side aircraft.
Owner’s select aircraft casualties amongst them, as OOB.

All “2” from attacking Fg,
All “2” or “3” from TacB, and defending Fg are considered regular hit.
All “1” to “4” from StB are regular hit, as OOB.

In this way, defending fighters are like having a D2 (12/36 odds) vs planes.
In fact, it is a 2 roll @1, 1 preemptive, the other a regular one. (Odds are: 1/36 to get 2 hits, 10/36 to get 1 hit).

All other Fgs and TcB get A1D1 vs planes.

StB cannot directly hit any plane.

Just have to imagine a plane battle (like escort and interceptor Rolling all @1 in OOB SBR) Inside the regular battle.
That’s why “1” are treated differently.

So defending Fighters are still better than those on offence.

In can be visualized like being able to scramble and intercept attacker planes just before they reach their ground targets.

After, allowing every planes but StB a chance to hit other planes on “1” roll is the aerial battle over the ground battle.

All other successful hits, just mean aircrafts destroy ground units.

What do you think of this one?

[baron Münchhausen]

Another aspect about reducing the Fgs and TcB cost is :

On an IPCs basis, Carriers are not as good offence nor defense as OOB.
CV 1942.2
A1D2M2C14+2Fgs A2D3M4C8 vs A1D2M2C14+2Fgs A3D4M4C10
A5D8 cost 30 IPCs                  vs          A7D10 cost 34 IPCs
13 pts for 30 = less than .5 ratio          17 pts for 34 = 1 for 2

To keep up the ratio, it means -4 IPCs
1942.2 CV must be reduce to 10 IPCs.

1940 CV must be reduce to 12 IPCs.

[oztea]

If you are going to do anything worthwhile it should include:

A: different unit costs for each nation

• Transports for the US cost less, while carriers for the Italians cost more

B: 1914 style combat (contested territories)

• Only one round is too slow. Make it 3 rounds. Or, better yet, roll at the beginning of each GAME turn (so one roll before Germany’s turn)
  This roll determines how many weeks this round represents. So if you roll a 3, all battles last 3 rounds, then units are locked into the territory and it becomes contested.
  Next turn, maybe you roll a 5, or maybe you roll a 1
  Naval battles would also have limited rounds.

Or not….

Im not sure what this project is going for.
Because AARHE was HISTORICAL edition
What does ENHANCED “mean”

Are we trying to fix whats broken?
Are we aiming to better replicate history?
Or is this just a house rule stew?

[Derek]

@Baron:

I would add that in PTO, USA would do an easy Island hopping, just need to bring 2 TTs, 4 Inf, enough shore bombardment to kill 2 units.
4 Cruisers (48 IPCs) give 2 kills on average.
3 BBs (60 IPCs) kill the same.

No USA Inf lost.
You can conquer almost every island without need of Inf reinforcement.

Do you see the gap in classic bombardment rules?

You make a very compelling argument here.
I am agreeing with you now,
However at no level is bombardment a surprise attack, everyone knows its coming. But if your pillbox or whatnot takes a direct hit from a BB main gun = death

I may have a solution, units hit by bombardment are regular casualties but they now roll at minus 1 on defense. With lowest possible being 1. So strat bombers and AAA would still roll 1s.

On your different idea about air combat…during the battle tac bombers would be targeting tanks and AAA, not fighters. I have posted a ruleset using 1s as special hits before. Maybe we should look into it further.

But I don’t see how it has anything to do with a defense scrambling to try to thin out enemy air before they reach the battle.

@Baron:

Another aspect about reducing the Fgs and TcB cost is :

On an IPCs basis, Carriers are not as good offence nor defense as OOB.
CV 1942.2
A1D2M2C14+2Fgs A2D3M4C8 vs A1D2M2C14+2Fgs A3D4M4C10
A5D8 cost 30 IPCs                  vs          A7D10 cost 34 IPCs
13 pts for 30 = less than .5 ratio          17 pts for 34 = 1 for 2

To keep up the ratio, it means -4 IPCs
1942.2 CV must be reduce to 10 IPCs.

1940 CV must be reduce to 12 IPCs.

Another compelling argument here, I am only on my phone right now.
When I have access to a pc I will look into this more.
I’m thinking your right, but 4 IPC is too much I think. I will look into it.

@oztea:

If you are going to do anything worthwhile it should include:

A: different unit costs for each nation

• Transports for the US cost less, while carriers for the Italians cost more

B: 1914 style combat (contested territories)

• Only one round is too slow. Make it 3 rounds. Or, better yet, roll at the beginning of each GAME turn (so one roll before Germany’s turn)
  This roll determines how many weeks this round represents. So if you roll a 3, all battles last 3 rounds, then units are locked into the territory and it becomes contested.
  Next turn, maybe you roll a 5, or maybe you roll a 1
  Naval battles would also have limited rounds.

Or not….

Im not sure what this project is going for.
Because AARHE was HISTORICAL edition
What does ENHANCED “mean”

Are we trying to fix whats broken?
Are we aiming to better replicate history?
Or is this just a house rule stew?

I like your ideas Oztea. What would be some of your suggestions for A?

Enhance; intensify, increase, or further improve the quality, value, or extent of.

[Derek]

After crunching some numbers on carriers and fighters.

By reducing the cost of carriers by 2 IPC, the new carrier/fighter combo is slightly improved on defense. While almost the same on offense.
Remember this is being paired with BB reduced to 18 IPC, cruisers reduced to 11 IPC and transports reduced to 6 IPC.
All of this taken together (along with tac and fighter reductions) should slightly reduce the effectiveness of submarines and destroyers, which is something i think many would like to see. Will have to do more math of course and testing to be sure it doesn’t reduce them too much, but according to what i have so far it, and what others have tested (see: Gamermans G40 changes) it doesn’t appear to do so.

Now a nation can purchase a carrier, 2 fighters and a transport for the same cost as just the carrier and fighters OOB.
Allowing more options and more action in the PTO, possibly even without the need for the 6VC that many seem to dislike.

Chart: 540 IPC (544 for DDs)
New carriercombo vs OOB carriercombo vs destroyers

New: 18, A72  D144  HP72
OOB: 15, A90  D150  HP60
DD:   68, A142 D142 HP68

OOB carriercombo attacking DD:  95% in favor of DD
New carriercombo attacking DD:  95% in favor of DD (no change)
DD attacking OOB carrier combo: 88% in favor of DD
DD attacking new carrier combo: 98% in favor of DD (a clear but minor buff)

New carriercombo attacking OOB carrier combo: 100% in favor of OOB
OOB carriercombo attacking new carrier combo: 100% in favor of new (no change)

OP updated on bombardment and carrier cost

[Derek]

Added:

11. Dice bonuses. On a dice roll of 1 (attack and defense) observe the following for the listed units:
-Fighters may choose an air unit as a casualty
-Tactical bombers may choose a ground unit as a casualty (land or sea)
-Cruisers may choose an air unit as a casualty
-Battleships may choose a surface vessel as a casualty (includes transports)
-Tanks may choose a ground target as a casualty
-Strategic bombers, (offense only) defender must choose 2 casualties

Also added neutral blocks

[baron Münchhausen]

@oztea:

Im not sure what this project is going for.
Because AARHE was HISTORICAL edition
What does ENHANCED “mean”

Are we trying to fix whats broken?
Are we aiming to better replicate history?
Or is this just a house rule stew?

Good questions here.
Uncrustable, are we working on a compendium of your House Rules?

There is many interesting things on this thread et much more to come, I would suggest you to separate in two parts your house rules:
1- the core house rules with new units costs & combat value and all closely related to,
2- optionnal house rule wich add depth and historicity but at the cost of simplicity.

For example: BB A4D4C18 2 hits, bombard @4 are core rules

Optionnal:
On a shore bombardment, a hit on any unit lower the defensive roll of this unit by 2, rounded up.
Ex.: a hitted ArtD2 or Inf, become D1, a tank D3 become 1.5= D2, AAA D1 becomes .5=D1, etc.

This way, we can better see what can be a fantasy and what is non-negociable from your perspective. What is essential to your system and what is not.
We could better focus and work on the essential to help it becomes more playable with less weakness.

Other question, if you take many changes vs OOB,  it will become very hard to get a balance set-up using OOB initial set-up.

We can make many suggestions, change many things but, ultimately, who will like to play with this HR and how could it be introduce in any 1940 or 1942.2 games?

[baron Münchhausen]

All enhancements are with minimal changes to current OOB rules.

I stress the importance of simplicity, meaningfulness and logic; the goal is to enhance the game, not make it unplayable.

The more there is non OOB rules, the harder it is to believe it.
At least, help us in making the difference between what is simple and minimal change (the essential) vs what could be meaningfulness and logic but at the cost of simplicity, somehow (creative thinking and out of the sand box, but not absolutly necessary.)

That is how I see the change about bombardment: more logical but less simple: not a main aspect of what you develop.
That’s why I suggest to keep it as an optional rule inside your enhanced House Rules compendium.

About this rule, I think you have to version and it is basicaly the same, any unit hit by bombardment: -1 to defense (minimum 1) or ½ defense, rounding up.

If (big if?) there is any unit with D4, will it get defend @3 or only @2?

I was thinking about the OOB fighter, then I remember yours only Defend @3…

[Derek]

Enhance; intensify, increase, or further improve the quality, value, or extent of.

[gamerman01]

@Uncrustable:

Will have to do more math of course and testing to be sure it doesn’t reduce them too much, but according to what i have so far it, and what others have tested (see: Gamermans G40 changes) it doesn’t appear to do so.

I haven’t done any testing, we’re just getting started.  Just to be clear  :-)

[baron Münchhausen]

@Uncrustable:

On your different idea about air combat…during the battle tac bombers would be targeting tanks and AAA, not fighters.

I have posted a ruleset using 1s as special hits before. Maybe we should look into it further.
It is not the same perspective. You had make all Fg and Tc A1, while Fg D2 and TcB D1, fighting together one round before the main battle.
In creating this AAA and aerial fighting step, all Fg and TcB are fighting each other as a preemptive strike vs the main battle. Same as two subs fighting in the Surprise step attack. I kick out the attacking fighters and TacB from this preemptive AAA step.

In this way I kept: “-All air units have an air combat value of 1, except fighters on defense at 2.”  Simpler, deleting this step, it will be more like OOB, except: giving your defending fighter a single preemptive strike similar to AAA. They fight twice @1. They can  “thin out enemy air before they reach the battle”.  
I hope you better understand the perspective: no additional step but a specific stat to 2 units (Fg/TcB)

But I don’t see how it has anything to do with a defense scrambling to try to thin out enemy air before they reach the battle.

[baron Münchhausen]

a) Fighters cost 8, attack/defend at 2/3.
b) Tac bombers cost 10, attack/defend at 3/3, no change to combined arms rules. Does not SBR
c)Strategic bombers cost 12 attacking/defending at 4/1, SBR as per OOB rules (no change from OOB)

I like the stat for Fighter and the dynamic you want to develop vs TacB, it is the real game changer vs OOB Fighter (they had always Defend@4).
The first Classic Fighter was a combination of all kind of fighter and TacB.

That was correct to give it D4, but now we can assign very different stat and capacity to both.

Now we have a TacBomber, it opens a Pandora’s box.  :evil:
And we are just starting to open this gap.
Sure, it will need more fine tuning, but it is good step.

[General Veers]

I like the idea of neutral blocks, but I’d combine Africa and Europe since all of the African neutrals are Portuguese and Spanish colonies. It’s not a big deal since outside of Angola and Mozambique I don’t think African neutrals get much action (US landing in Rio de Oro I guess). Liberia should be US-friendly anyway (there should be country specific friendly neutrals, including Brazil for the US).

As far as NOs go the UK desperately needs the restore the sub bonus and get a commonwealth bonus.

[Derek]

Baron: There is no sub vs sub dynamic in the game. Nor there should be.

My proposal on the air battle is simply a scramble operation for the defender. (and an optional one at that)

Look at it this way: Defender scrambles planes to intercept incoming planes. They only fight momentarily before the main battle begins, at which point fighters would continue to vie for air dominance while any tactical bombers would begin their mission of taking out enemy ground positions.

Other than that i have no idea what you are trying to say.

The dice roll bonus, and scramble are 2 different things.
The dice roll bonus is meant to promote the purchase of the more expensive units (BB, cruiser, air, tanks) while also adding a bit of ‘realism’, ie. tanks hunting tanks, tacs hunting tanks, cruisers providing air defense, fighters hunting bombers, etc etc

[Derek]

@General:

I like the idea of neutral blocks, but I’d combine Africa and Europe since all of the African neutrals are Portuguese and Spanish colonies. It’s not a big deal since outside of Angola and Mozambique I don’t think African neutrals get much action (US landing in Rio de Oro I guess). Liberia should be US-friendly anyway (there should be country specific friendly neutrals, including Brazil for the US).

As far as NOs go the UK desperately needs the restore the sub bonus and get a commonwealth bonus.

I agree on both

[baron Münchhausen]

@Uncrustable:

Baron: There is no sub vs sub dynamic in the game. Nor there should be.

Yes there is in OOB 1940 or 1942.2
Just imagine a fleet including Subs but without Destroyer, what would happen?

All Subs (attacker and defender) will have Surprise Strike first.
Usually, subs units (off or def) will be taken as casualty before all other costlier vessels.
Hence, subs vs subs dynamics.
It is a rare situation, but it is inside the rules.

With your AAA and aircombat step, you get the same situation, except it is plane which are destroy.

[baron Münchhausen]

@Uncrustable:

My proposal on the air battle is simply a scramble operation for the defender. (and an optional one at that)

Look at it this way: Defender scrambles planes to intercept incoming planes. They only fight momentarily before the main battle begins, at which point fighters would continue to vie for air dominance while any tactical bombers would begin their mission of taking out enemy ground positions.

Other than that i have no idea what you are trying to say.

The dice roll bonus, and scramble are 2 different things.

OK it is a defender’s choice to do it  or not.
And you also say it is an optional rule of your HR compendium, is it?

4. Enhanced air combat (land combat only). New scramble option, a defender may scramble air units into a 1 round air defense battle vs incoming air units, the scrambling air units must be in the territory being attacked. (cannot scramble from adjacent territory).
Strategic bombers may not scramble. All air units roll simultaneously.
All air units roll 1 dice hitting on a 1, except fighters on defense hit on a 2 or less.

The hits are totaled for each side and divided by 2 (rounding down).
AAA units also fire during this round. AAA roll AA dice on defense only as per current OOB rules.
Remove casualties before continuing to normal combat.

–Example, attacker rolls for 13 planes. Records 5 hits. =2 adjusted hits
-----------Defender rolls for 8 planes. Records 3 hits. Also rolls for 2 AAA (6 dice) and records 2 hits. =3 adjusted,combined hits (1 for planes +2 for AA dice)
-------------Attacker removes 3 planes (chooses own casualties), defender removes 2 planes. (also chooses own casualties)

Can you tell me where does come the "The hits are totaled for each side and divided by 2 (rounding down) " ?
Help me better understand.
It is far from simple and not inside actual OOB rules mechanics.

[Derek]

It is stated very clearly in the OP that the scramble is optional, no different than OOB SBR scramble or scramble to adjacent seazones.

Also I reiterate, there is no sub vs sub dynamic in the game, even when a sub hits on sneak attack, the defender chooses casualty.

The hits are divided by 2 to reduce air casualties, maybe the scramble needs removed altogether I do not know

[baron Münchhausen]

@Uncrustable:

It is stated very clearly in the OP that the scramble is optional, no different than OOB SBR scramble or scramble to adjacent seazones.
That point is ok for me. No problem in it.

Also I reiterate, there is no sub vs sub dynamic in the game, even when a sub hits on sneak attack, the defender chooses casualty.
Example: 2 Subs 2 Cruisers vs 3 Subs and 1 Cruiser.
In this situation, will you sacrifice you cruiser first, during the surprise strike phase?
I don’t think so. Then the first casualty either offence or defense will be the subs which were the only to fire during the surprise strike phase.
The difference with your scramble and AAA phase is that any “hit” in excess would not affect the ground troups in the regular phase. In the Subs special phase, you can.
In our case, suppose the 3 defending subs were dumb lucky. The third hit will go to the attacking cruiser.
Are you convinced?
The AAA and aerial combat (planes vs planes) is more segregated from the regular battle phase than the “surprise or submerge” phase (Subs vs subs without DD in the picture).

The hits are divided by 2 to reduce air casualties, maybe the scramble needs removed altogether I do not know.
The scramble phase is an interesting aspect, need more tuning but I think it has potential (but also a potential for unbalancing effect).
“hits are divided by 2 to” is very alien to actual OOB mechanics. If you want to reduce casualty, one of the other way is to reduce attack or defend factor.
Or, another way is, to give double hits like BB to some planes (for this phase only, any damaged plane can be considered destroyed for the next phase.) AAA fire are considered making a double hit.
Ex.: 1 FG + 3 TcB vs 2 Fg + 1 AAA
If AAA hit, means 2 hits / 2 Fgs hit means 2 hits. If it was the case then 4 hit = 2 planes destroyed. If the Fgs had hitted once, it also means 2 planes destroyed, because one is still damaged. The four attackers can only destroys up to 2 defending fighters, with 3 or 4 hits.

[Derek]

The hits are divided by 2 to reduce air casualties, maybe the scramble needs removed altogether I do not know.
The scramble phase is an interesting aspect, need more tuning but I think it has potential (but also a potential for unbalancing effect).
“hits are divided by 2 to” is very alien to actual OOB mechanics. If you want to reduce casualty, one of the other way is to reduce attack or defend factor.
Or, another way is, to give double hits like BB to some planes (for this phase only, any damaged plane can be considered destroyed for the next phase.) AAA fire are considered making a double hit.
Ex.: 2 Fg + 1 AAA vs 1 FG + 3 TcB
If AAA hit, means 2 hits / 2 Fgs hit means 2 hits. If it was the case then 4 hit = 2 planes destroyed. If the Figs hit once, it also means 2 planes destroyed. The four defender can only destroys 2 attackers.

Well divide by 2 or require 2 hits to destroy planes, they are both the same thing, and both ‘alien’ to the game as you say. But either would work, for a practical matter i feel dividing by 2 then adding AA is easier to implement.

I feel it actually may be ok to simply take the hits as is, seeing as the defender has the option to scramble or not.
He/she would, in most cases, only scramble if the odds are favorable. This in essence adds a ‘strategic air superiority’ factor to the game.

Also I reiterate, there is no sub vs sub dynamic in the game, even when a sub hits on sneak attack, the defender chooses casualty.
Example: 2 Subs  2 Cruisers vs 3 Subs and 1 Cruiser.
In this situation, will you sacrifice you cruiser first, during the surprise strike phase?
I don’t think so.  Then the first casualty either offence or defense will be the subs which were the only to fire during the surprise strike phase.
The difference with your scramble and AAA phase is that any “hit” in excess would not affect the ground troups in the regular phase. In the Subs special phase, you can.
In our case, suppose the 3 defending subs were dumb lucky. The third hit will go to the attacking cruiser.
Are you convinced?
The AAA and aerial combat (planes vs planes) is more segregated from the regular battle phase than the “surprise or submerge” phase (Subs vs subs without DD in the picture).

No im not convinced, there are many scenarios where losing a non sub would make sense, and either way, there is always the option.
I also don’t even have a clue as to why we are talking about this, what is its relevance to this thread?