@Navalland said in Artillery to defend at 3?:
Just trying to figure out the most balanced unit set up and wondering if +1 defense to artillery would be good idea. Probably better to leave it as it is right now.
Ya I would for now.
AARHE: Phase 3: Income
-
Well the easiest way for you to reveal it is to say that you have entered a convoy zone. If this is to easy, you can always say “You have entered one of my Convoy Zones, but you must roll a 3 or less on a 6 sided die in order to attack.” (BTW, you would only have to do that once, all subsequent units are considered to know where the convoy is). And the enemy can decide, “I’m attacking your convoy.” Or, “I am not attacking your convoy.” Which he must follow through with whichever one is his choice. He can only decide to attack a convoy at the beginning of his combat round even though it is carried out in the collect income phase. BTW, is it your collect income phase or his? I assume his, giving you a chance to attack his fleet if you want to.
Kenya merely acts as a “supply” depot, collecting the resources from itself and all adjacent territories and shipping them out. Kenya’s Income could be transported via French West Africa if you wanted to make it a port, it will be able to collect 4 IPC’s that Kenya cannot “reach” in British Controlled Africa. The more money touching a territory the better. Also if a port is captured the convoy could possibly fall under Blockade Rules with a twist. You have to pay 1 IPC for each Territory you are transferring goods from per turn making some territories just not worth it. An idea to throw into the mix.
GG
-
precisely are you going for option 1 or option 2?
yeah dice roll during convoy player’s collect income turn
Kenya merely acts as a “supply” depot, collecting the resources from itself and all adjacent territories and shipping them out. Kenya’s Income could be transported via French West Africa if you wanted to make it a port, it will be able to collect 4 IPC’s that Kenya cannot “reach” in British Controlled Africa.
Ok so income CAN travel multiple land spaces before reach the sea.
And still no port restrictions right? That is, all sea shore territories can potential be a “port”. -
Option 1…
I actually was thinking that when you start to “conquer” inland that the multiple land territory income.
All sea territories can be potential ports yes… The thing I am not so sure about is inland territories having the kind of transport abilities mentioned on a base convoy. FWA was adjacent to Kenya so it could do that. So now you are suggesting that I could add Anglo Egypt and FWA to the “Convoy” income. I am willing to do this but you need a way to “upgrade” your convoy in order to do this. So here it is:
In order to upgrade Convoys you must pay the cost of the convoy to the bank again. You can now mark “2” on the convoy level box next to the affected convoy. It may transport double the amount of income and can transport goods from territories 2 inland or adjacent to adjacent territories.
Like it?
GG
-
um French Western Africa is not adjacent to Kenya
anyway
so you DON’T want income to able to travel more than 1 land space before going to the sea? -
Didn’t say that, and I meant FEA (sorry I don’t have the map in front of me)… I made the system limited because tell me how you can limit how far your production can go if all you need is Anglo-Egypt (For Example) open and a convoy in South Africa (shortest route, least amount of cash spent) if every British Territory in Africa-Asia is connected? Then all you would need is one in Australia… It can only be limited to the Adjacent Territories unless you have a write in “expanding” element right on the log. Or unless you have another idea? Personal opinion the one I just posted is the simpliest solution to overextending Convoys…
GG
-
yeah ok income can only travel 1 land territories before entering the sea
(or maybe we could make it 2 land territories)but I think we might have to dump the convoy “SZ” idea
and back to convoy “route”
ie all SZs on the route is “hitable”I mean Australia has 4 paths which is shortest or shortest+1 SZs
Australia -> UK
9 via Med Sea
9 via South Africa
9 via Panama
8 via South America -
I am up for all hittable, just give me a roll every time… Convoys weren’t always on the route, and sometimes weren’t always found, so they can’t be that easy to hit… If you don’t want to upgrade Convoys that is fine with me. Once you starting heading inland you will have to buy IC’s, that will make for some interesting strats…
GG
-
I am up for all hittable, just give me a roll every time
this is about search roll before attack roll?
don’t see why we need it
just lower the change of the one rolleach hostile naval unit (but not transports) can hit on a 1…or maybe 2
2 IPC is destroyed
cant destroy more than the value of convoys going through the SZ of courseOnce you starting heading inland you will have to buy IC’s, that will make for some interesting strats…
right, we’ll leave it at maximum of 1 land movement for sea bound convoys
-
Got it, forgot about attacking the convoy, I thought it was auto hit… Make it Hit on 1 for now, we can change it after playtesting it… I think this about wraps it up… Have we missed anything?
GG
-
Actually hitting on 1 is quite weak compared to OOB/LHTR.
Wasn’t it something like auto hit 1 IPC per German submarine?Maybe we need to make it hit on a 3, or even auto hit 1 IPC.
-
Convoy
An IPC path consisting of sea zone(s) is a “Convoyâ€. IPC must enter the sea from the source territory or an adjacent territory. It may then travel to the destination via the minimal number of sea zone or one more sea zone. For example, Australia’s income to be spent at United Kingdom may only travel 8 or 9 sea zones.
Convoy are decided and recorded by the player at end of “Collect Income†phase. It is revealed at beginning of the player’s next “Collect Income†phase. Each hostile naval unit besides AP (transport) in a convoy sea zone may perform a convoy attack roll. 1 IPC of friendly convoys in that sea zone is destroyed on a roll of 3 or less. Damage allocation procedure is the same as team combat causality.Convoy ships were not safe in the sea. Over 1500 allied ships were sunk in 1942 alone. 8300 US merchant mariners were killed at sea in WWII. Convoys are time consuming and the war economy depends on logistics planning, particular for UK and Japan. Due to reducing flexibility as convoys approach their destination, majority of sunken allied convoys were in North Atlantic.
-
Actually I thought it would be better if you could “hide” your convoy routes… But for now I like how we got it setup… We can work out the bugs later…
GG
-
supposedly not much “hiding” can be done
so make let convoy decisions remain secret for one round onlythe website I got the statistics from
http://www.usmm.org/ww2.html
Germany often had advanced knowledge of ship movements through spies and interception of radio messages about planned convoy routes and cargoes, but even without that information, submarines would line up about 15 miles apart across the expected convoy route. The first to spot the convoy would fall in a few miles behind and signal for the rest of the “pack” to assemble for the night attacks. Groups of U-Boats would stage simultaneous attacks from several directions.and for some OMG
By October 1942, when U.S. and British Air Forces finally bombed the submarine pens, they had been reinforced with 12 feet of reinforced concrete. The Allies dropped 40,000,000 pounds of bombs, lost over 100 planes, and not a single U-Boat was damaged.
-
OK! Convoys "phase 1"re done… I think! :wink:
-
Actually with this convoy thing we didn’t cover all cases.
UK player plans convoy to send IPC from Australia to India IC.
And then India falls to Japan during Axis turn.
What happens now? -
Theres something subtly strange with the game sequence logics.
The collecting and spending of IPC.Read the text for the two game phases, phase 1 and phase 2.
When do you declare saving and spending of IPC?
In phase 2: collect income we have…
Blockade
IPC (Industrial Production Certificates) to be stored must have a passable path from the territory to a capital under the player’s control. IPC to be spent must have a passable path from the source territory (or capital for stored IPC) to the Industrial Complex or Victory City. A passable path consists of territories your land units may go through and/or sea zones. A path consisting of sea zones is a “Convoy†and further restrictions apply. IPC not spent nor stored is forfeited.But phase 2 is after phase 1, where we purchased already.
Maybe I am going crazy. Someone help me.
I try to think back and recall in playtesting the purchase and collect income phases tend to blur together.
-
Convoy
An IPC path consisting of sea zone(s) is a “Convoyâ€. IPC must enter the sea from the source territory or an adjacent territory. It may then travel to the destination via the minimal number of sea zone or one more sea zone. For example, Australia’s income to be spent at United Kingdom may only travel 8 or 9 sea zones.
Convoy are decided and recorded by the player at end of “Collect Income†phase. It is revealed at beginning of the player’s next “Collect Income†phase. Each hostile naval unit besides AP (transport) in a convoy sea zone may perform a convoy attack roll. 1 IPC of friendly convoys in that sea zone is destroyed on a roll of 3 or less. Damage allocation procedure is the same as team combat causality.Convoy ships were not safe in the sea. Over 1500 allied ships were sunk in 1942 alone. 8300 US merchant mariners were killed at sea in WWII. Convoys are time consuming and the war economy depends on logistics planning, particular for UK and Japan. Due to reducing flexibility as convoys approach their destination, majority of sunken allied convoys were in North Atlantic.
========= What is the point of having this? I can only see the idea is to be able to attack a nations income that is coming from other areas of the map. Thus for say Canada’s IPCs do benifit UK and the axis player can attack the income in a manner by placing a sub or ship in the path of sea zones between the two territories up to the value of Canada.
Who even came up with this?
Secondly, Blockade is basically saying you need a path clear of enemy forces from all income sources. This was written somewhat differently from the original idea which was to prohibit income from small islands if the enemy had a ship in the sea zone around the island.
We should rewrite these and remove one of them.
This is unnecessary fluff to the varient.
WE should keep the idea that small islands cannot send income if you got a ship around the SZ
WE should also only allow lend lease payments to be subject to attacks even if your not actually “sinking” the transport. This can be abstracted by allowing attack on merchant shipping lanes with something like this: "Each hostile naval unit besides AP (transport) in a convoy sea zone may perform a convoy attack roll. 1 IPC of friendly convoys in that sea zone is destroyed on a roll of 3 or less. "
the income loss is counted on the following income phase
-
@Imperious:
Who even came up with this?
Back in October, you said
@Imperious:
When you guys decide the convoy system post the entire idea as you want it in the rules. I dont have much time to figure it out.
so me and Gureilla Guy discussion for 2 pages and made this rule.
(hence this is all strange to you)The old system was fine for Islands. (complete blockade with one ship or 1 IPC loss per ship or die rolling doesn’t matter)
But for continenent sea ports it seems not good enough. Its mainly about which sea port a territory’s IPC can use. Is the route allowed to go via sea-land-sea-land…We’ll tune this convoy thing with your input.
Anyway…
The main thing was the game logics and problem I think I see whats wrong now.
Can we have Collect Income phase before Purchase phase?The only reason why Collect Income is after Purchase is because the normal game setup you are given IPCs to start right?
-
the reason why collect income phase is performed after purchase units phase so you can have money to pay for enemy SBR and any other economic attacks with money on hand.
so me and Gureilla Guy discussion for 2 pages and made this rule.
(hence this is all strange to you)LMFAO!! no wonder why it looks so strange… LOL. I knew i wasnt involved in that deal. I should have paid closer attention.
Lets go back to the idea that blockade is actually a realistic method of denying income because the control of the sea zone prohibits the transfer of IPC to the parent nation. This will apply to all islands except austrailia, england, and Japan. So basically all islands that are included INSIDE of a sea zone. You must control the sea zone or you dont get the income.
Can we have Collect Income phase before Purchase phase
Yes sure lets go back. If enemy performs SBR then the income is reduced from the following turns income basis.
Get rid of that convoy thing or have GG come up with a good argument why its needed. I think it burdens the system and is confusing.
-
@Imperious:
So basically all islands that are included INSIDE of a sea zone. You must control the sea zone or you dont get the income.
Thats fine. LHTR/OOB defines islands as a territory inside a sea zone. Australia, Japan, UK were never Islands.
Can we have Collect Income phase before Purchase phase
Yes sure lets go back. If enemy performs SBR then the income is reduced from the following turns income basis.
Actually…the “economic damage done to territory’s next collect income phase” is already in the draft.
Get rid of that convoy thing or have GG come up with a good argument why its needed. I think it burdens the system and is confusing.
Its not just Guerilla Guy I also thought its not enough.
But yeah we can get rid of convoy.
Instead of planning (writing down) sea trip of Australia’s IPCs for next turn…
you just look at the map at beginning of next turn and if UK is blocked by then you can send to India IC insteadyou can force your way thru hostile sea zone, the “1 IPC for each non-AP sea unit hitting on 3 or less” thing
Suggested Topics
