New Piece: Conscription Center

France paratrooper can also simulate commandos  along european shore.

Also, you can identify special infantry or Marines with a Control Marker below the sculp.
That way, you can increase their cost without having to buy 1914 or 1941 to get different Infantry sculpt.
I still wonder if a 3 IPCs unit can be a balanced cost for a weaker Marines unit able to move with Cruiser and BB.
As written elsewhere:

Marines as simply Marines and nothing more
Cost 3
Attack 1-2
Defense 1
Move 1

Sea movement bonus:
1 Marines unit can be carried on 1 Battleship or 1 Cruiser.
Transport can load 2 Marines or 1 Marines plus any other 1 ground unit.
Gets +1A on amphibious assault only.

No combined arms with Artillery.
No production limit number.

That way, 2 Marines for 6 IPCs, A4 D2 on amphibious assault will be better cost ratio than regular Infantry paired with Artillery A4 D4 C7.
But, in defense, 2 Marines Defense @2 cannot hold the ground as 2 Infantry Defense @4.

And also 2 Marines being weaker if going inland combat by themselves because of the no pairing bonus with artillery. But they stay on par 1:1 compared to a single Infantry on offense.

Also, in amphibious assault, Marines will be probably taken amongst first casualties compared to regular infantry because it is the same attack factor than Inf with Artillery (but have a lesser defense factor (very low 1), unless you keep them to move on a Cruiser or BB and want to spare TP to turn back home for new supply on next turn. So, such Marines unit will more often die during debarkment and regular Infantry will last longer, in anticipation of next assault going inland.

About Infantry moving NCM only with Cruiser or Battleship, it cannot simulate the initiative and offensive role being taken by Marines such as Guadalcanal.
As far as I understand, Marines were first almost everywhere in PTO while regular army troopers were mopping behind Marines and garrisoning conquered islands. Maybe the exception is Peleliu in Palau islands.

Good points guys - this is why I like to post ideas here. You’ve convinced me this idea won’t really work. Thanks for the input!

wow didn’t think the idea would be this well recieved ok well here’s a total run down of the Lead-Lease rules I use.
First throw out the Soviet NO of lead lease. 2nd any power may purchase supply tokens not just USA. Both Germany and UK provided there allies with Lend Lease type aid. The supply tokens cost 1 cashed in at major or minor IC for 1 IPC, 3 worth for a Minor, 10 for a Major. Supply Tokens are cashed in during the “Collect Income” phase of your turn. So it’s possible for the USA to move Supplies to the Island of Great Britian and on the next turn move them to Russia only to have the UK cash them instead. Due to the fact BotB is a tactical game and '42, '42 or Global is well a Global game then I down sized the trucks ability to carry supplies limiting it to 3 supplies per truck. Transports carry 6. Trucks cost 2 move 2 carry supplies or carries Inf. like in BotB but it’s 1 inf or suppllies not both. Trucks end there movement when they unload, Like transports do. and like in BotB they are captured not destroyed. I have the HGB pieces so I also have transport planes Transport Plane: Cost 7 move:4 can carry 1 inf. or 1 supply (so not to weaken the usefullness of sea transports), they can fly over impassible territories (not neutrals) but it cost 3 movement to do it. (Flying supplies over the hump). Nations that don’t have a truck piece for themselves just use either US or German with a nation token under the truck.

I’m still working on the Burma Road thing as of right now I leave it alone but i do want to figure something out. The biggest hang up is the lack of a Chinese IC and that the Burma Road is two (chinese) territories so just letting cash them in at one while the other is in Axis hands has an unbalancing effect. But they should be able to cash them in after the road has been cut because of the Air Lifting supplies over the himalayes. So I’ve been alittle stuck but then again to be honest I need to put more thought into it.
Transports can carry one unit plus 3 supplies or 1 inf and 1 other unit. I use the 1 unit plus 3 supplies (1 truck, 3 supplies) because the OOB setup doesn’t take these rules into account so it speeds up getting things going because in Global with no Lend Lease NO. Russia could use some help in getting the supplies flowing faster. It’s atleast 2 turns after German attacks before Russia cashes in supplies the first time.
The answer to your question about the UK. As long as the supplies are at an IC they can be cashed in. So unloading supplies on the Island of Great Britian and cashing them in without the trucks is fine. The thing with the trucks is the supplies have a move of 0 so you have to have other units to move them. In this case USA built them in Eastern USA and moved them with transports got them to another IC so you’re all set. Trucks is just letting them move over land.
Oh and in games not named Global any IC will do. If your using Minor and Major IC in your '42 games then i suggest using the rule of 3 for minor 10 for major.

These rules were written after BotB was released and was first used with Revised. I have only updated them to keep them current.

@Krieghund:

@The:

And also, that is not true about china taking control of the british territories. They can occupy, but not control. Even if india is japanese.

Knp7765 is right.  China can control those territories if India is held by the Axis.  The wording is a bit ambiguous in the Rulebook, but that’s the intent.

Ah, thanks. And yes, this needs rewording. It says…

“Kwangtung and Burma are special cases. While they are not Chinese territories and cannot be controlled by China, Chinese forces can attack axis units there and occupy them, but the ipcs generated go to the United Kingdom (unless India is under Axis control). These are the only non-chinese territories that chinese units can occupy”

This specifically states that china can’t control them, only occupy. I inferred that the place where it says (unless India is under axis control) simply meant that the ipcs obviously wouldn’t go to india in this case. In fact, this whole paragraph can be boiled down to simply…

“China can defend/take kwangtung and Burma.”

And then obviously you would know that they couldn’t take it unless india was axis controlled.

I think that radar is a little weak. Perhaps make it a minor tech? Or make radar activate always active AA guns. That would be scary.

@Cobert:

It’s like when people try to incorporate the rules from Europe involving bomber escorts into Revised or AA50 - with each turn representing a period of several months and each territory representing miles upon miles of land or entire countries, I think it’s insane that they want a rule that makes a unit shaped like a fighter accompany a unit shaped like a bomber to actually mean that there are fighter escorts with the bomber.

Well I can see your point ref scale of the action and so I’d support the geographic boundary with no house rule for CAP or any FTRs defending adjacent space etc.

But otherwise, I’m leaning towards the optional escort / interceptor rule as it reflects the operational decision on whether you use your fighter resources defensively or base them forward to project air cover.

First, I am assuming that all submarines in A & A attack from periscope depth, not the surface.  That is the only way that the first strike rule for submarines can be justified.  If all subs are attacking on the surface then aircraft should be able to attack subs without a destroyer present, and all surface ships should get a free shot at the sub with no chance of reply, as most successful torpedo attacks occurred at ranges of less than 2,000 yards, point blank range for surface guns.  The attack chance is based on a submerged sub attacking a sub running on the surface, not submerged.  WW2 boats spent most of their time on the surface, submerging only to attack or avoid aircraft and surface ships.  The snorkel only came into use by the Germans in mid-1944, and did allow for diesel running while submerged.  If you wish, I will post a detailed discussion of WW2 submarine tactics and operational proceedures.  If you argue that all subs are always submerged, then they should have a movement of 1 sea zone every two turns, to reflect the very low speed of submerged running.  You cannot have it both ways.

OK yes submarines attacked at periscope depth and then immediately submerged at the first sign of trouble. And what the ‘first strike’ idea is supposed to model. However, fighters didn’t have the tactic of attacking subs down until the mid war period and up until that time reconnaissance planes ( in our case bombers) were used as spotters for convoy or for wolf packs to hunt convoy system. Those snorkel types you mentioned are the type XXI Walter U-boat turbine system which could travel in some cases underwater faster than some allied destroyers ( about 16 knots). Also you have to know that a turn in AA is something like 4-6 months which is plenty of time to move around and not really effect its movement. The 2 movement point thing is for play balance issues because if naval vessels had unlimited range it would mess up the game because its already a highly abstracted strategic system.

As for a submerged submarine sinking a submerged submarine, the HMS Venturer sank the U-864 while both were submerged on February 6, 1945.  This is the first recorded case of a submerged sub being sunk by another submerged sub.  Both the US and the UK in the immediate postwar period began the development of hunter-killer subs designed specifically for submerged ASW engagement.  During WW2, British submarines sank 35 enemy submarines.  I will need to check on the totals for the other countries.

I knew you would bring up that example: but the game is representing one submarine as something like 20-40 submarines for each ‘piece’ and that is only one example near the last days of the war. Hardly anything to base a major principle of naval combat on IMO. The game has to reflect what actually happened as a matter of normal affairs during the war . All postwar developments wont help us model WW2.

like Eastern Europe isn’t adjacent to Turkey nor Black Sea
but your title mentions “revised”