Adapting A&A1914 rules for G40

[baron Münchhausen]

@ossel:

I also want to work on adding an air superiority combat phase anyway; I’ll be posting my initial stabs at these rule adaptations in the House Rules forum soon.

Hi Ossel,
Hope I gave you some water to the mills.  :-D

If you find I derailed somehow from your intent on this thread, let me know, I will put elsewhere the long posts.

See you soon on this forum,
Baron.

[Razor]

@Baron:

However, you will have another balance issue with 2 planes carriers because Fighters will not be very effective vs TacBs. And carriers with 2 Fgs on it vs warships will not get a real chance.

Yes, I like that, its just how it was in the real war. Carriers had a small fighter screen for protection against air attack, not to sink enemy battleships. Actually I don’t think a fighter can sink any ships with its machine guns. Only torpedo bombers, dive bombers, medium bombers and heavy bombers can sink ships, fighters can not. Was it the UK carrier Glorius that had fighters only, and got sunk by German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in 1940 ? And how many waves off carrierbased divebombers against Tirpitz, before she was sunk by Avro Lancaster heavy bombes. And were it medium bombers that sunk Prince of Wales and Rodney, and how many fighters attacked the battleships at Pearl Harbor and Taranto ? None, only dive bombers, yes. You need a torpedo to sink a ship, not a small machine gun.

It is correct that Carriers become the capital ship of this time, pushing battleships down to a second place. But it is not correct that fighters had more firepower than warships. A divebomber slowed Bismarck down, but it took battleships and destroyers to sink her. And submarines sunk far more ships than planes did. The main difference between a battleship and a divebomber, is that the divebomber come out of the horizon, and the enemy ships are out of sight, making it an air to sea battle. The divebombers torpedoes against the warships AA gun fire. Most of the hex and counter games have different values for a warships ability to fight other ships or aircrafts. But the A&A warship have only one combat value, that it use for all purposes. The A&A battleship hit on a 4 or less to other battleships, subs, aircrafts and shore bombarement. This is the problem.

To the game, to let fighters sink warships is in the same alley as sub attack other subs, which only happen one time during WWII, when a UK sub sank a German sub. Attack submarines did not come until the 1970 s. Down the same alley is the classic tranny that could defend on a roll of 1. Buy 10 trannies, and they would sink any battleship. And a transport sinking a battleship never happened in any war. Luckily that is fixed now, since the G40 trannies must be taken as casualties after the warships.

[Razor]

@Baron:

Don’t forget these two units are fighting against Inf A2D3C3 not OOB A1D2C3.

Basic Infantry unit is much more powerful here.

The true problem is that the infantry use the same combat value for all purposes. It defend at 3 or less against both other infantry, artillery barrage from far away, tanks and heavy bombers high up in the sky. This is to keep it simple. A&A is a game, not an in depth war simulation.

The best fix the way I see it, is to divide general combat in two phases.
Flak, Dogfight and ground strafe phase.
Fighters A1 and D2, can target other aircrafts, or strafe ground units.
Tacs strafe ground units A3 and D4
St Bombers carpet bomb infantry stack A1 + A1 + A1, limited to one die for each unit
AA guns fire at aircrafts D1 + D1 + D1, limited to one die for each plane

All hits are preemptive, so ground units cant kill aircrafts in the ground unit phase
Surviving ground units go as usual. Tanks get a boost with a matching Tac

The same with Naval Combat
Fighters A1 and D2, can target other aircrafts or strafe ships
Tacs, in this case dive bombers, strike ships A3 and D4
St Bombers should roll one die with 4 or less a hit, since you don’t carpet bomb ships

All ships do Anti Air fire. Each ship roll one die, every 1 a hit.

Remove casualties
When one part is out of planes, then start surface combat with the usual combat values

[General 6 Stars]

Then have 3 plane carriers that can have a combine of fighters, tac, dive, and torp.
Fighters cant attack ships. Fighters just support air space.
Tac,dive and torp can attack ships.
Battleships attack at 4 but were they better at attacking ships or planes and did they sink alot of subs :|

[Razor]

@SS:

Then have 3 plane carriers that can have a combine of fighters, tac, dive, and torp.
Fighters cant attack ships. Fighters just support air space.
Tac,dive and torp can attack ships.
Battleships attack at 4 but were they better at attacking ships or planes and did they sink alot of subs :|

Since we are talking house rules, you are free to load your carriers with as many planes you want. But myself, I prefer the classic 2 plane carrier for several reasons. First, its standard so everybody are used to it. But more important, since the A&A carrier unit represent 6 real life carriers, and a WWII carrier had from 50 to 70 aircrafts, then 6 carriers can have a max of 500 aircrafts. The 6 carriers at Pearl had 350 aircrafts. Lets say an A&A fighter represent 250 real life fighters, then it feels correct to place two fighters on a carrier. 3 is one too much. Some people would even say one fighter is enough, since it looks like the A&A plane unit is more than 500 hundred real planes, judging from the set up.

Of course fighters too can attack ships, but not on A3 and D4. Fighters can do A1 and D2 against ships, I am fine with that, no problem

No, real life battleships were far too big and slow to do effective sub hunting, and to my knowledge no sub was sunk by a battleship, and only one sub by another sub. And for game purposes, warships and planes need a destroyer to hunt subs. Lets just pretend the battleship hit was assigned something useful

[baron Münchhausen]

@Razor:

@Baron:

However, you will have another balance issue with 2 planes carriers because Fighters will not be very effective vs TacBs. And carriers with 2 Fgs on it vs warships will not get a real chance.

Yes, I like that, its just how it was in the real war. Carriers had a small fighter screen for protection against air attack, not to sink enemy battleships. Actually I don’t think a fighter can sink any ships with its machine guns. Only torpedo bombers, dive bombers, medium bombers and heavy bombers can sink ships, fighters can not. Was it the UK carrier Glorius that had fighters only, and got sunk by German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in 1940 ? And how many waves off carrierbased divebombers against Tirpitz, before she was sunk by Avro Lancaster heavy bombes. And were it medium bombers that sunk Prince of Wales and Rodney, and how many fighters attacked the battleships at Pearl Harbor and Taranto ? None, only dive bombers, yes. You need a torpedo to sink a ship, not a small machine gun.

It is correct that Carriers become the capital ship of this time, pushing battleships down to a second place. But it is not correct that fighters had more firepower than warships. A divebomber slowed Bismarck down, but it took battleships and destroyers to sink her. And submarines sunk far more ships than planes did. The main difference between a battleship and a divebomber, is that the divebomber come out of the horizon, and the enemy ships are out of sight, making it an air to sea battle. The divebombers torpedoes against the warships AA gun fire. Most of the hex and counter games have different values for a warships ability to fight other ships or aircrafts. But the A&A warship have only one combat value, that it use for all purposes. The A&A battleship hit on a 4 or less to other battleships, subs, aircrafts and shore bombarement. This is the problem.

Sorry, I still believe that there will be very few fighters A1D2 put on a 2 places Carrier.
Too much limited places.
And attacking TcB have the same attack value A1 vs attacking fighters: A1 in the dogfight phase.
So Fg not a great unit to put on board.

Maybe 1 Fg out of 4 planes or 2 out of 6, IDK.
It will need more carriers to recreate an optimized mixed of Fg and TcB.

This means that only TcB A3D4 will be put on Carriers.
Which is inaccurate historically.

OOB have some incentive to buy 1 TcB+ 1 Fg. (+1A when paired)
Not your 1914G40.

I’m not sure to follow you on every aspect of 1914 system, since Strafe is a separate phase, no ground units (Inf, Art, Arm) are able to roll against planes, only AAA during the first phase: Flak phase. (Does planes can destroy AAA somehow? Or just wait the strafe phase?) Right?

Does attacking TacB @1? and Fg @1 dogfight with defending Fg@D2 and TcB@1?

What happen to the surviving planes after the air-to-air combat phase, (1 or 2 rounds?), how many?, since it is not to the death?

Does attacking TacB @3 et Fg @1 do strafing while defending Fg@D2 are just strafing the invader’s ground unit also?

Does attacking TacB@3 do strafing while attacking Fg@A1 are still fighting against the defending Fighters @D2?

How many rounds for strafing attack? Just one?

[baron Münchhausen]

@Razor:

To the game, to let fighters sink warships is in the same alley as sub attack other subs, which only happen one time during WWII, when a UK sub sank a German sub. Attack submarines did not come until the 1970 s.

This is inaccurate historically speaking, this sub vs sub was unique because both subs were underwater.
But there is a lot of subs vs subs destruction:
Read the three posts and follow the link in them:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31177.msg1149576#msg1149576

[ossel]

@Baron:

@ossel:

I also want to work on adding an air superiority combat phase anyway; I’ll be posting my initial stabs at these rule adaptations in the House Rules forum soon.

Hi Ossel,
Hope I gave you some water to the mills.  :-D

If you find I derailed somehow from your intent on this thread, let me know, I will put elsewhere the long posts.

See you soon on this forum,
Baron.

Baron,
  Thanks for the message. I do feel as if the thread has derailed a bit; I was going for more of a KISS approach in applying a few of the neat mechanics from 1914 to 1940, but I don’t begrudge the discussion at all. I’m always interested in hearing new ideas.  :-D

[baron Münchhausen]

@ossel:

@Baron:

@ossel:

I also want to work on adding an air superiority combat phase anyway; I’ll be posting my initial stabs at these rule adaptations in the House Rules forum soon.

Hi Ossel,
Hope I gave you some water to the mills.  :-D

If you find I derailed somehow from your intent on this thread, let me know, I will put elsewhere the long posts.

See you soon on this forum,
Baron.

Baron,
  Thanks for the message. I do feel as if the thread has derailed a bit; I was going for more of a KISS approach in applying a few of the neat mechanics from 1914 to 1940, but I don’t begrudge the discussion at all. I’m always interested in hearing new ideas.  :-D

What does this means “KISS”?

I have 1914 but never have a chance to play on it.
Maybe I miss something on the basics dynamics of Air combat and Strafing run.
Of course, it is the dog fighting thing which raise all of my enthousiasm, and put me on my “breakthrough on 3 planes carrier” which resolve many of the issues raise by lower cost and combat value for planes when trying to develop an air-to-air combat system.

Probably my mind is still too much stuck in reg A&A system than 1914 system.

For example, I was trying to reduce the fighting value of plane vs OOB in order to lower IPCs cost.
But is it necessary to do this to keep balance?

Maybe such a low

6 IPCs for a Fg  A2D3 in dogfight and A1D1 when strafing ground or warships and
8 IPCs for a TcB A1D1 in dogfight and A3-4D4 when strafing ground and warships (getting +1A with Air Supremacy)

is still a correct cost.
Because WWII planes were much better warmachines than WWI.
And the system provides a plane vs plane destruction before doing strafing attack.

Infantry unit get a a bit over 1.5 boost for same 3 IPCs they are A2D3.
Artillery unit get 1.5 boost a  for same 4 IPCs vs ground, A3D3 and still give a +1A support Inf.

2 Inf units for 6 IPCs = A4-6D6
vs
I Fg A2D3, are twice effective.

2 Art units for 8 IPCs = A6D6M1 +2A boost for Inf
vs
1 TcB A3-4D4M4 getting +1A from Air Sup and +1A to tank have not a so great advantage.

---

Just see Fg as an air-Infantry doubling the 3 IPCs cost.
And TcB as an air-Artillery doubling the 4 IPCs cost.
It can help viewing differently these combat values for costlier units than ground ones.

[General 6 Stars]

KISS= Keep it simple stupid.

[baron Münchhausen]

@SS:

KISS= Keep it simple stupid.

Thanks. :-)

[baron Münchhausen]

@Razor:

@SS:

Then have 3 plane carriers that can have a combine of fighters, tac, dive, and torp.
Fighters cant attack ships. Fighters just support air space.
Tac,dive and torp can attack ships.
Battleships attack at 4 but were they better at attacking ships or planes and did they sink alot of subs :|

Since we are talking house rules, you are free to load your carriers with as many planes you want. But myself, I prefer the classic 2 plane carrier for several reasons. First, its standard so everybody are used to it. But more important, since the A&A carrier unit represent 6 real life carriers, and a WWII carrier had from 50 to 70 aircrafts, then 6 carriers can have a max of 500 aircrafts. The 6 carriers at Pearl had 350 aircrafts. Lets say an A&A fighter represent 250 real life fighters, then it feels correct to place two fighters on a carrier. 3 is one too much. Some people would even say one fighter is enough, since it looks like the A&A plane unit is more than 500 hundred real planes, judging from the set up.

Of course fighters too can attack ships, but not on A3 and D4. Fighters can do A1 and D2 against ships, I am fine with that, no problem

I’m not sure that historical rationalization should come first in line before game fun and balance of units. However, it is still a matter of preference to pick one HR on an other when playing on a board game: it is a game.

Once this said, I don’t know where you get your infos about 50 to 70 planes on carriers.
Everywhere I checked it, I get:
Yorktown-class like Enterprise can have up to 90 crafts on board.
Essex-class CV can have up to 100 crafts on board.
(Maybe it was the real historical number, you are talking, while I’m talking an optimal number should the real carriers have their full load.)

Usually, according to what I could find, the ratio Fighter vs TcB (Torpedo/Dive Bombers) is 2/3 vs 1/3. (Based on light carrier planes distribution.)
Taking 6 Essex-class gives 600 hundreds planes. (Keeping round numbers.)
Approximately 400 fighters will be F4F Wildcat/or F6F Hellcats
and 200 TcBs will be TBF Avengers (Torpedo Bomber)/ SB2C Helldiver (Dive bomber).

So each sculpt could represent 200 planes instead of OOB 300 planes.

If you add to this the fact that Fg and TcB units have reduced value compared to OOB unit, it can easily be made for the changing ratio of the unit:
300 real life TcB give 1 OOB TcB A3D4  and
200 real life TcB give 1 1914G40 TcB (for 3 place carriers) A2D3.

Here you see how it is possible to rationalize it differently.

Of course fighters too can attack ships, but not on A3 and D4. Fighters can do A1 and D2 against ships, I am fine with that, no problem

For Fighter I just put A2D2 nothing more.
And targeting planes first (instead of warships), if their is still enemy planes during the strafe phase.

Here is the combat value for regular combat:
Fighter   A2D2M4C7 when paired with TcB give +1A, always hit aircraft first (owner’s choice), then can choose AAA.
TcBomb  A2-3D3M4C8 when paired with Fg get +1A First Strike (no retaliation from casualty) when getting Air Supremacy

---

Edit:
I finally find this about planes type distribution:

Yorktown class “as-built” design characteristics:
Aircraft (Typical operational complement, November 1942): 88 planes,
including 36 F4F fighters, 36 SBD scout-bombers and 16 TBD torpedo planes

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/usnshtp/cv/cv5-7cl.htm

Essex class “as-built” design characteristics:
Aircraft (average operational complement, October 1944): 90 planes,
including 38 F6F day fighters, 4 F6F night fighters, 27 SB2C scout-bombers, 18 TBM torpedo planes, 3 F6F photographic planes.

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/usnshtp/cv/cv9cl.htm

[baron Münchhausen]

About the air-to-air phase:

I suggested that for the planes which can be put on a 3 planes Carrier.

Here is the combat value for air-to-air:
Fighter A2D2
TcBomb    A1D1
StBomb   A1D0

I know you advocate the A1D2 Fighter to keep the same value from one phase to another.

You make Fighter better on defense than on offense.
You probably think about Battle of Britain effect.
I also kept this historical point by adding this:

When scrambled from AirBase Fg and TcB get +1D on air-to-air battle.

That’s it for the planes going on board a 3 places CV.

---

Now, talking about a balanced 2 places Aircraft Carrier I just suggested these combat value:

6 IPCs for a Fg  A2D3 in dogfight and A1D1 when strafing ground or warships and
8 IPCs for a TcB A1D1 in dogfight and A3-4D4 when strafing ground and warships (getting +1A with Air Supremacy)

I can now explain the combat value of Fg A2D3.

Just think it is based on the same pattern than your A1D2 Fg.
Planes are better on defense than offence.

On air-to-air you get this:
Fg A2D3
TcB A1D1
StB A1D0

So, in dogfight a Fighter (@2/@3) is always better than a TcB and a StB (@1).
A defending Fg (@3) is better than an attacking one (@2).
And finally, attacking StB (@1) are just on par with TcB (@1/@1).

The historical combat scale is preserved all the way.
But is not always the case with a Fg A1D2.
Attacking Fg vs attacking or defending TcB are on the same level: @1.
But attacking fighters were better in dogfight than TcB.

You don’t talk about StB, I suppose you give it A0D0 in air-to-air combat.
Which I found too low compared to all other SBR and interception rules (G40 and 1942.2).

Finally, with a real Fighter A2D3 against other planes,
it makes sense to put 1 Fg on a 2 places Fleet Carrier with 1 TcB.
The combat weakness of a unit in the air/in strafing phase is saved by the strength of the other.
G40 CV A0D2C16, 2 hits, carry 2 planes, A1D1??? vs Air
1 TcB A3-4D4C8, A1D1 in dogfight
1 Fg A1D1C6, A2D3 in dogfight

A full carrier will cost: 30 IPCs
Attack against naval: A4-5
Defense against naval: D7

---

Attack against Air: A4
Defense against Air: D5

How does it stand vs 4 DDs A8D8 32 IPCs?
And an OOB full Carrier (Fg/TcB) A7D9C37 IPCs vs this same 4 DDs?

So, 1914G40 full Carrier is it weaker or stronger vs OOB?

I hope you see how it is an answer to this call:

But myself, I prefer the classic 2 plane carrier for several reasons. First, its standard so everybody are used to it.

[baron Münchhausen]

@Razor:

The best fix the way I see it, is to divide general combat in two phases.
Flak, Dogfight and ground strafe phase.
Fighters A1 and D2, can target other aircrafts, or strafe ground units.
Tacs strafe ground units A3 and D4
St Bombers carpet bomb infantry stack A1 + A1 + A1, limited to one die for each unit
AA guns fire at aircrafts D1 + D1 + D1, limited to one die for each plane

All hits are preemptive, so ground units cant kill aircrafts in the ground unit phase
Surviving ground units go as usual. Tanks get a boost with a matching Tac

The same with Naval Combat
Fighters A1 and D2, can target other aircrafts or strafe ships
Tacs, in this case dive bombers, strike ships A3 and D4
St Bombers should roll one die with 4 or less a hit, since you don’t carpet bomb ships

All ships do Anti Air fire. Each ship roll one die, every 1 a hit.

Remove casualties
When one part is out of planes, then start surface combat with the usual combat values

I need more explanations to understand in details what you mean.
How long each phase?
What difference it makes when there is no more plane? What is the unusual combat values vs the usual combat values of all warships?

[Razor]

I am just brainstorming, man, just want to see if there can me made rules that are slightly more advanced than OOB, but not go as far as the http://ww2wargame.com/, that is a very advanced A&A style game, as you probably know. So I don’t like rules that depart too far from the OOB. But since we are talking house rules, you are of course free to do what ever you want. I just don’t love the 3 place carrier. And I don’t want to glue counters with 4 different combat values under my ships, like the WWII, struggle for Europe game does. I want it simple, but at the same time as historical correct as possible.

I think only the Strategic Bombing Raid should be one round only. General combat, air to air combat and naval combat cant have fixed limits, except if there was winter turns or mountain terrain, in which case the winter and mountain make it difficult to supply the land units for more than one round of combat. But whit the current game, it is the players choice to press continue attacks for one more round, or quit fighting but stay in the territory to contest it, or just retreat, after each round of combat, since this model the real war in a correct way.

So we should not adapt the one round of combat rule from the 1914 game. Napoleon walked from Poland to Moscow on his feet in less than 3 months during his war in 1812, and used 3 more months to walk home again. If combat is one round only, and a turn is 3 months, the motorized German panzer army would need several years to reach Moscow, and that would be derogatory. I don’t wanna play that game. Actually, I think infantry should move 2, and Mech move 4 spaces.

Yes, aircrafts will be weaker than the OOB, but I always said the A&A planes were unhistorical strong. There were no case in WWII where a squadron of fighters would even kill a 14 000 man strong infantry division, not to mention a corps or army group, which is common to see in the A&A game when 2 inf supported by 3 fighters kill 3 or 4 infantry. Actually I think aircrafts should not kill land units, they should be ultra long range artillery that boost up a matching tank to A4. But I realize that would be too advanced for the casual player

[baron Münchhausen]

So we should not adapt the one round of combat rule from the 1914 game.

Maybe up to 4 rounds of ground battle Max could be correct (otherwise the game will be too slow)?
1 turn = 4 months.
3 turns = 1 year.

I think only the Strategic Bombing Raid should be one round only.

You are weakening the StB vs OOB:
Using gross stat calc:
In a limited 3 rounds at @4 StB: 12 points = 2 hits out of 3 casualties max.
3@1= 3 points around 1/2 to destroy 1 unit. out of 3 casualties max.
3@2= 6 points around 1 hit. 1 hit out of 3 casualties max.

Is it what your are looking for (since, you said: Yes, aircrafts will be weaker than the OOB, but I always said the A&A planes were unhistorical strong.)?
If it is the case, then reduced the cost of StB.

Actually I think aircrafts should not kill land units, they should be ultra long range artillery that boost up a matching tank to A4.

Here I think that you are going to review G40 from scratch, and it will not be KISS.

Besides that, what are the Air-to-Air value of TcB in your mind? And of StB?
Clearly the A3D4 was not for dogfight.
(I think we agree that in this phase, Fighter should be the superior unit.)

Am I right supposing this for your Air-to-Air:
Fg A1D2C6, same value  Strafe, up to 3 rounds (I hope for 4)
TcB A0D0C10, and A3D4 for Strafe phase, up to 3 rounds (I hope for 4).
StB A0D0C12, and 3@1 on Strafe on 1 single round of strafe (I hope for 4, 1 bomb carpet per historical month.)

The Air-to-Air only phase is 1 round, then proceed to strafe. (We agree on this.)
Strafe is a one round actually.
I hope a four rounds:
within both phase should be alternate: strafe-1 / ground-1 / strafe-2 / ground-2, etc.

Strafe is a separate phase than ground battle. This forbid ground to hit aircrafts.
During strafe, Fg can choose to crashed down other planes instead of ground units.

Ground cannot shoot any aircraft (as in 1914), except for AAA guns preemptive strike during the Air-to-Air phase or a previous Flak only phase.

(I’m not sure you can go this far with G40.)
Is it an important part of your 1914G40 HR?

You would played it differently with naval units.

I will come to it later, once I clearly see where you are with your system.

[baron Münchhausen]

@Razor:

I am just brainstorming, man, just want to see if there can me made rules that are slightly more advanced than OOB, but not go as far as the http://ww2wargame.com/, that is a very advanced A&A style game, as you probably know. So I don’t like rules that depart too far from the OOB. But since we are talking house rules, you are of course free to do what ever you want. I just don’t love the 3 place carrier. And I don’t want to glue counters with 4 different combat values under my ships, like the WWII, struggle for Europe game does. I want it simple, but at the same time as historical correct as possible.

I think we are going in the same direction with same principles for judging House Rules.
I’m just trying putting some creative thinking and new ideas, not just blunt criticism and complain about some implications which can be deducted of your suggestions and much defined rules of the system you are trying to develop.

The historical comments I have put, were just to keep it as much historically accurate it can be.

I can try to improve the system even with keeping a 2 planes carrier and 1 single value for planes.

Is it acceptable to you a system like this?:

Air-to-Air phase (Dogfight):
All planes (Fg,TcB, StB) inside A-to-A phase roll A/D @1. Remove casualties.
Defending fighters then roll a second cycle inside the phase. Remove casualties.
Then, all attacking Fgs can roll for a second cycle. Remove casualties.

Then proceed to strafe phase.

During Strafe phase, only Fg can attack other planes:
All Fgs @1 but defending Fgs keep a preemptive strike in every cycle during this phase against aircraft and ground unit.
If any Fg’s hit cannot be allocated to aircraft then it is allocated to a ground unit.
Fg still attack ground unit with A1D1C5???. (simple.  :wink:)

Now, about the TcB A3D3C8? and StB A4D1 (or else but with at least the same casualty ratio).
TcB should get an Air Supremacy bonus anytime there is no more enemy’s Fg and TcB, StB doesn’t count.

Air Supremacy: +1A/D to TcB (Thinking about naval battle: could be +1A/D to Fg also.)
(You can also add some kind of bonus for StB.)
You can also choose that this +1A/D go also to 1 Tank per plane in the sky…
It will be an incentive to buy fighters to get ride of enemy’s one and get this bonus.

Besides Flak, maybe AAA gun (a@1) could get a chance to hit something during strafe phase on ground units.)

No other ground unit can.

Fleet A1D1 vs planes is good idea. During strafe and naval phase?
But when can they attack or defend? It could be a choice from player?

Maybe capital ships with 2 hits, BB and CV could get 2 rolls @1.
CV A0D2 can even get 2 roll @1 on offense vs planes only.

Or simply let the player choose casualties as regular G40 OOB naval battle.
And let DD/CA/CV/BB attack and defend with the same value as OOB.
All is the same as OOB naval combat, except for Fighters. But all units, including planes can be chosen as casualty. It is a regular combat.
KISS?

Now you need to discuss about a balance price for each units.

What do you think?

[baron Münchhausen]

Air-to-Air phase (Dogfight):
All planes (Fg,TcB, StB) inside A-to-A phase roll A/D @1. Remove casualties.
Defending fighters then roll a second cycle inside the phase. Remove casualties.
Then, all attacking Fgs can roll for a second cycle. Remove casualties.

For my part, this is a complete breakthrough to get a HR for SBR and intercept in G40.

It will have a better historical feel than the actual OOB all @1.
Fighters get a special treatment on the second cycle.
A second chance to make a hit.
I gave preemptive to defender because everyone agree that defending planes have a little superiority over attacking ones.
The first cycle is a regular because, even defending planes have to scramble and can be caught off guard. They get the superiority once in the air.

I will probably put this on a different thread for discussion and improvement of the actual OOB SBR of G40.

[Razor]

@Baron:

Strafe is a separate phase than ground battle. This forbid ground to hit aircrafts.
During strafe, Fg can choose to crashed down other planes instead of ground units.

Ground cannot shoot any aircraft (as in 1914), except for AAA guns preemptive strike during the Air-to-Air phase or a previous Flak only phase.

This I can like.

But after reading a lot about air combat during WWII, I figure that only fighters and AA guns should be able to hit other aircrafts. Most of the Dive bombers did not have weapons to fight other aircrafts, and even if some of the heavy bombers, like the B 17 Flying Fortress, did have some machine guns in rear and front, it was very rare that they killed other fighters. All stats show that bombers without fighter escorts was an easy target to interceptors. To give fighters Anti Air ability is the same as only the Destroyer unit has Anti Sub ability, since in the real world all ships have some ASW capability. I say, give the fighter an unique ability, like the Destroyer unit have

Then I suggest a preemptive air to air combat phase as followed.
Fighters A1 and D2, must target aircrafts before land
Tacs A3 and D4, can not hit fighters
St. Bombers, carpet bomb infantry stack A1+A1+A1, D1. Or SBR facilities
AA guns target aircrafts A1+A1+A1, limited to one die for each plane
Then remove casualties, and since all hits are preemptive, they cant return fire any time.

Or a more innovative idea, say aircrafts can not kill land units, only lower their combat value. So when a plane roll a hit, then a matching ground unit is removed to the casualties board, but can not return fire to other ground units for the duration of that turn. This look historical correct.
In the case where two inf and 3 planes attack the lonely inf, and the planes hit, then the inf can not return fire to the attacking inf.

Or what about this. Each plane can absorb one hit in the ground combat, modelling that air supremacy suppress the enemy. This will be in the same alley as tanks absorb hits with the blitzkrieg tactic, which also suppress the enemy.

I think maybe fighters can boost artillery to A4, but not boost tanks.
Tactical Bombers should of course boost a matching tank to A3, since they act as ultra long range artillery, the same way as artillery boost infantry

The naval combat can go as OOB.
Fighters A1 D2, must target other planes before ships
Tacs A3 D4, and get a boost to A4 if paired with a fighter
St. Bombers D4

Battleship A4 D4
Cruiser A3 D3
Destroyer A2 D2

Maybe the inherent Carrier defense value should be boosted, to compensate for the weaker fighter. Let say you can land 2 planes on the Carrier, but the Carrier itself has a little fighter force just to close combat self defense, making the carrier defend on D3 ?

[baron Münchhausen]

@Razor:

Maybe the inherent Carrier defense value should be boosted, to compensate for the weaker fighter. Let say you can land 2 planes on the Carrier, but the Carrier itself has a little fighter force just to close combat self defense, making the carrier defend on D3 ?

Very good idea: it is a can opener. It gives much room to compensate.
Maybe you can even give it the classic A1D3, if necessary for balance.
Or even going that far: A2D3, so almost all of the OOB A3D4 Fg + A0D2 Cv= A3D6, will be converted: Fg A1D2 + CV A2D3 = A3D5.

Just suppose that there is a bunch of escorting ship/fighters wich can not be separated from the Carrier unit.

It can probably solve a lot of balance problem.