Pictures of Volkstrum, German Paratroops, Marines and UK Commandos

1942.2 is a very neat and faster pace game than other versions of AA, nevertheless the china rules of AA50 and paratrooper tech are both aspects bring in more historical realism, fun and tactical depth to the game in overall. I have tried to incorporat both rules as houserules into 42.2 and would like to have your comments on it if these break the balance . My group are not very sophisticated AA fans therefore a 6:4 balance would not significant impact to our overall result i believe.but of course i want to make the variant as balance as i can

China variants
As i know the original setup is more favour Axis side. And SU in general has a less resources other than her two alliances. So my rules set as below
a.) China power is controlled by SU player
b.) Except the initial IPC, China’s controlled territory IPC are reduced from US productivity.
c.) China can occupy and control only the 8 territories including Formosa/kwangTung/Manchuria .
d.) China only can produce infantry according to AA50 rules except 1 infantry/1 allies controlled territory in China.

The reason for this is enhancing China defence against Jpy in early rounds as it can deploy before Jpy invades. Also the cheaper cost of infantry (1 IPC= 1 inf) is offset by less IPC for US player. Thirdly SU player will has more fun when compared to us and uk.

Paratroopers variant

Generally , players tends to push all their ground force all to the most front line and leave its central territory very empty without any threat. Introduce of para hope can solve this unrealism. I modify the AA 50 rule of para and allow in the beginning of the game.

In combat move , 1 bomber can carry 1 infantry to the target hostile territory Moving and landing rule are as same as normal except the bomber can fly through hostile territories as long as it has legitimate landing route. When the bomber fly through and at the target territory with Aaa gun (during combat move only), do the aaa gun chking as usual combat.

We play tested once with both rules , we found the China rule brought a little upclimb difficulty for JPN player, but in long run , as US has fewer resources and get more balance and has a bit less impact to Axis

With paratrooper variants. We tends to build up more aaa gun and deploy inland or islands , also we will leave some def forces at some strategic territories which the overall deployment tactics looks more reasonable on the map.

Since we did not heavily play test enough,feel free to comment if you sight any potential problem to these variants

@Young-Grasshopper
cool stuff but half hour is a bit much for me. Be nice if you could summarize in a paragraph or two :)

@Caesar:

The problem with Commando’s in terms of usage of a board game is that they are technically irregular infantry. So I play an online AnA type game called Superpowers where the special unit in that game, the commando works like an artillery piece that can attack on its own, so it goes into the territory, does it attack and if they defender doesn’t kill it, it returns to the territory it came from but it can’t take territory ever because it is programmed like artillery.

Yep

Commando (2 Max on map ) in AA game can move 6 spaces on land or sea and make a 1 time attack per round each on any piece with a no defense shot. If it stays then it can be attacked or if it has movement left it can leave territory its in and move out.

Or I have in UKs event card deck,  1 card saying any 2 Commandos on map can do a Raid attack with the above rule.

Heaven forbid. Time to JAZZ up these games !!!

What could be unbalancing is UK putting a minor in Egypt (and/or Iraq) UK1, even with a sealion feign UK could still put a minor in Iraq or Egypt with little to no repercussions.
If Germany doesn’t threaten Sealion (Or DOW Russia) G1, UK could put a minor in both Egypt and Iraq and an Airbase in Egypt, and still plop a couple INF in UK or India. (Sounds powerful)

The thing is, in G40 enhanced this rule change is along with adding all of Canada and the 2 South African territories to ANZAC (creating the Common Wealth Dominions).
This takes away some UK income (10IPCs), thus reducing the impact of a single UK economy, thus reducing the overall impact on game balance.

Would just need testing.
And speaking of, im looking at some time off work coming up, and will be testing alot of G40 enhanced out.
And A F2F game during thanksgiving, in which id like to play atleast a preliminary version of G40 enhanced.

OK, got it.

Interresting combination of 2 rules and a way to promote islands hopping:

http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4222&start=48

Darby wrote:
All Amphibious Assaults
a) Are at -1 for land amphibious launched land units for the first two rounds.
b) Defenders fire at +1 for the first round.

Amphibious Assaults staged from an adj. tt with some land in it - negate one round of Offensive minuses, and negate the Defensive pluses.

I REALLY like that it still allows people to do the 3 move assaults, but makes it more difficult.

Here’s a few changes I suggest:

On all amphibious assaults, all attacking units in the land battle have their attack value reduced by 1 for the first round of combat and all defending units in the land battle have their defense value increased by 1 for the first round of combat (These include Shore Bombardments and Anti-Aircraft Guns). If all transports unloading units on the amphibious assault have moved one or less spaces this turn before unloading, all units attack and defend without these modifiers.

�A lie never lives to be old.� � Sophocles

mantlefan
Post subject: Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 pm

The Changes do well to clarify … but I’m still wondering if we want to reward coming from a bit of land that serves as a logistic staging base.
The way you have it worded – A fleet can wait in a sea zone for a turn before attacking – No benefit as compared to attacking Honolulu from The Marshalls or Japan from Iwo Jima
(Besides the benefit of course of being able to put you land units safely on the islands while waiting to attack rather then at risk on transports.)

Do we want to reward Island hopping as well as just slow assault speed ?

Also I don’t think all attacking units should be minus just ones from transports
a) planes should not really get a minus
b) units from adj. flanking land tts should not get minuses (eg. Landing in Normandy - support from Holland)
c) Shore Bombard should be at full if applicable
etc.

hat might work, but it still harms the UK in London more than it helps Japan IMO. I like the idea where you can still attack if you want, but your troops fight worse if it’s done long range. How about a fusion?

Land units unloading into a enemy territory from transports that have moved 3 spaces that turn have their attack value reduced by 1 for the first round of combat. Land units (including Anti-Aircraft guns) that are defending in an amphibious assault have their defense values increased by 1 for the first round of combat, as long as at least one of the Transports unloading into the territory has moved 3 spaces that turn

good point calvin.  :-)

Thanks - was wondering if anyone was going to respond to my Elite infantry rules…

Yeah - think I’ll try out the battlemap option, I moved to a new city and - though I have found some other gamers, they aren’t into A&A as much as my old crew…