G40 Balance Mod - Rules and Download

[gamerman01]

@axis-dominion:

@Gamerman01:

In most cases, to carry out convoy disruptions is to sacrifice other opportunities or better position for those units
So to get skunked by the dice and do 0 damage really sucks.

But I’m sure not as bad as getting shot down in a bombing raid! Ugh that’s gotta be the worst feeling in this game. Especially when it happens to you like 5 out of 6 times in one game, as is happening to me in my current game vs abh!

I agree, and I lost quite a few bombers in our first game as well.
My point is I don’t like more of this dice pain, especially after we who were playing G40 at the time were all used to the automatic calculation without dice.

[Adam514]

After much deliberation, the marine-kami rule will be the following: marines can unload from friendly cruisers/BBs and the cruisers/BBs are not subject to kamikaze attacks, nor do they stop the unloading.

Reason: should be a rare occurrence, so might as well take what TripleA does by default.

[JDOW]

Is this logical? Why should a cruiser/BB carrying a marine should be immune to Kami?
Does this mean I can send cruisers into a sea battle against Japan at e.g. Phil and use Marines to make them immune to Kamis? I don’t get that.

Why not: They can unload BEFORE the Kami strike but are subject to Kami then?

I think this is another (small but not irrelevant) advantage for the Allies.

[gamerman01]

Great, thanks Adam!

JDOW, it’s only if a different power’s marine is on a different power’s cruiser/battleship
Kamikazes can still totally be used against USA ships carrying USA marines or ANZ ships carrying ANZ marines

If you leave a fighter at the Philippines, the landing is impossible

[regularkid]

Right. By way of further clarification, the Anzac cruiser carrying the US marine (for example) CAN be kamikazied on ANZAC’s turn it the cruiser engages in combat. The Kamikazi exemption only applies to that cruiser on the US’s turn, if and when the US elects to unload the marine.

[simon33]

Sounds fair. I presume that means if a sea combat is triggered by a scramble, the Kamikaze is still permitted.

[Adam514]

@simon33:

Sounds fair. I presume that means if a sea combat is triggered by a scramble, the Kamikaze is still permitted.

Not sure what you mean by that. Scramble would prevent a lone friendly cruiser from unloading a marine of another power, just like it would prevent a lone friendly tp.

[simon33]

@Adam514:

@simon33:

Sounds fair. I presume that means if a sea combat is triggered by a scramble, the Kamikaze is still permitted.

Not sure what you mean by that. Scramble would prevent a lone friendly cruiser from unloading a marine of another power, just like it would prevent a lone friendly tp.

Ah sorry. Forgot we were referring to only allied (different nation) cruisers.

[dawgoneit]

I am having problems downloading the bm map.
could someone help me please.
thank you very much

[regularkid]

do you have the latest version of TripleA? What steps are you taking to download the map and what is happening?

[simon33]

@dawgoneit:

I am having problems downloading the bm map.
could someone help me please.
thank you very much

Should be contained in the Global set of maps.

[JDOW]

@Gamerman01:

Great, thanks Adam!

JDOW, it’s only if a different power’s marine is on a different power’s cruiser/battleship
Kamikazes can still totally be used against USA ships carrying USA marines or ANZ ships carrying ANZ marines

If you leave a fighter at the Philippines, the landing is impossible

ok, thanks for clarifying.

[mrcunego]

Can anyone clerify this wording:
“Also, when not at war with Japan, Russia may not move its units into any non-Russian Allied territory in Asia, other than Syria, Trans-Jordan, Iraq, Persia, NorthWest Persia, and East Persia.”

How does this work with the wording in the rulebook about Russia being a neutral power and thus not being able to move into other neutral or allied/axis powers territories? So if Russia still isn’t at war with anyone (being a neutral power) would they in Bal. Mod 2.0 be allowed to move units down to those 6 territories?

Thanks in advance.
Best regards MrCunego

[simon33]

@mrcunego:

Can anyone clerify this wording:
“Also, when not at war with Japan, Russia may not move its units into any non-Russian Allied territory in Asia, other than Syria, Trans-Jordan, Iraq, Persia, NorthWest Persia, and East Persia.”

How does this work with the wording in the rulebook about Russia being a neutral power and thus not being able to move into other neutral or allied/axis powers territories? So if Russia still isn’t at war with anyone (being a neutral power) would they in Bal. Mod 2.0 be allowed to move units down to those 6 territories?

Thanks in advance.
Best regards MrCunego

It’s assuming USSR is at war in Europe. Otherwise you can’t move into those territories either.

[mrcunego]

So USSR is at war with germany/italy and not japan. Those 6 territories is open for Russias movement if they are under allied control. Not if there are neutral. Correct?

[Adam514]

@mrcunego:

So USSR is at war with germany/italy and not japan. Those 6 territories is open for Russias movement if they are under allied control. Not if there are neutral. Correct?

As long as they are not Japanese or do not contain Japanese units, Russia can move into them (when at war with Euro Axis). So yes Russia can move into them if the territories are neutral.

[mrcunego]

Thanks for the help.

[8thGuards]

Looks cool to me.

[simon33]

Version 2.2 of Balanced Mod resolves the China getting convoyed bug.

To anyone who cares/understands was an issue with a duplicated XML node - the second one overwrote the first. Needed one node with both properties.

You’ll need to re-download the map to get it.

[Adam514]

Thanks!