AA Guns

@Baron:

What is the difference between Alpha 2 and Alpha 3?

Alpha 2 AA Guns were the same as any other Axis and Allies game.  They were not destroyed, they could be captured, they got 1 shot at each attacking plane in the first round and then no shots from then on, etc.
Alpha 3 they became valid targets and were destroyed before being captured, but they got 3 shots at attacking planes, each, as long as there were enough planes to shoot at.

Basically, it all revolved around Sea Lion, I think.  I mean, at the time of the change there was a lot of crying and moaning about how easy Sea Lion was and how horrible it was (Despite the fact that if you kept playing, odds were really good you could beat the Germans even if they HAD London, just cause they were so weak from using all their money on transports one round and losing all those ground troops and having to rebuild them, etc.)  Honestly, Sea Lion was a major calculation in my KJF strategy.  I assumed Germany was going to get creamed by the British but take England and thus, the only real threat on the board was going to be Japan so I devised a way to use India, Australia and America to beat the snot out of the Japanese (since America entered the war when London fell.)

It had the desired effect, IMHO, Germany was weak and still gathering herself while Russia built up against her, Japan was effectively required to do something about the wave of American bodies being thrown at it allowing the Chinese and Russians to breathe a little, and eventually, Russia could start taking any enemy territory on the board or German/Italian territory and got amazing income.  (There was even strategies about having Russians get on little boats for territories like Pauline for 3 IPC cause all those Japanese islands worth 0 for everyone else, were worth 3 IPC for Russia) and it got REALLY ridiculous.

At one time we had the Russians with 14x 3 IPC NOs for territories around the board, most of which couldn’t be taken by the Axis even if they wanted too since they had no navy to stop them.  That’s 42 IPC a round, btw, which is a HUGE benefit and why the Russian NOs were rewritten to exclude things like the Carolines, Pauline, Crete, Erie, etc… lol

Very interesting!
Thanks for taking time to write it down. :-)

I’ll ask again….

WHEN is this getting moved to the House Rules thread??

That, or please move my “France starting first” thread back here.  Otherwise, the double standard is really beginning to irritate me…

@DizzKneeLand33:

I’ll ask again….

WHEN is this getting moved to the House Rules thread??

That, or please move my “France starting first” thread back here.  Otherwise, the double standard is really beginning to irritate me…

I’m backing you.
Your tread was meant for 1940 Global only, even if you propose a slight change in it.

This one on AAA guns and the other about TTs have to go into House Rules.
It has a wider scope.
I suppose it is just a question of time for this one.

@Uncrustable:

What’s wrong with my idea?

AAA are treated as normal unit during normal combat. Hitting on a 1.
They still get the 3 preemptive rolls at planes
This follows choose your own casualties

This is very self explainatory IMO

So once a battle begins (after the preemptive 3 AA dice), AAA roll no differently than, say an infantry. Except obviously the AAA hits only on a 1

Does not matter if there are planes or not

@Uncrustable
Have you considered this?
I find it much more consistent as a fully transformed AAA.

AAA becomes a uniformized ground unit as A1D1M1C5+1=C6  AAA first strike on opening fire phase against 1 plane only.
This idea imply AAA capacity on opening rnd for both attack and defense.
Maybe against 3 planes @1 in defense and against 1 single plane @1 on offense for the opening round of fire instead?

@Baron:

@Uncrustable:

What’s wrong with my idea?

AAA are treated as normal unit during normal combat. Hitting on a 1.
They still get the 3 preemptive rolls at planes
This follows choose your own casualties

This is very self explainatory IMO

So once a battle begins (after the preemptive 3 AA dice), AAA roll no differently than, say an infantry. Except obviously the AAA hits only on a 1

Does not matter if there are planes or not

@Uncrustable
Have you considered this?
I find it much more consistent as a fully transformed AAA.

AAA becomes a uniformized ground unit as A1D1M1C5+1=C6  AAA first strike on opening fire phase against 1 plane only.
This idea imply AAA capacity on opening rnd for both attack and defense.
Maybe against 3 planes @1 in defense and against 1 single plane @1 on offense for the opening round of fire instead?

AAA
Cost: 6
Move: 1
Attack: 1
Defense: 1
Special ability: On defense only, roll one dice for each attacking plane OR 3 dice for each defending AAA whichever is less (no change from OOB)

The preemptive AA should be on defense only, for both common sense/historical purposes and for balance.
It seems absurd to me that an attacking AA division would be able to sneak in and set up an intricate network of AA defense in hostile territory and then proceed to shoot planes out of the sky! lol
Keep in mind, just because it doesn’t get preemptive AA rolls doesn’t mean it cannot shoot down planes, its just now ‘choose your own casualties’

Yes and i like it very much.
It actually makes the game a tad simpler in my opinion (AAA is a normal unit with a special ability rather than a special unit with a whole page of unique rules)
It does increase the effectiveness of AAA (but not by too much)

Its special ability is 3 AA rolls on defense

Keep in mind, just because it doesn’t get preemptive AA rolls doesn’t mean it cannot shoot down planes, its just now ‘choose your own casualties’

@Uncrustable:

Its special ability is 3 AA rolls on defense

Keep in mind, just because it doesn’t get preemptive AA rolls doesn’t mean it cannot shoot down planes, its just now ‘choose your own casualties’

In this manner, it will be a completly consistent AAA ground unit.
Keeping up the same killing ratio vs plane: a 1 time @1 either offense or defense.
But still much better on defense: first strike +2 additionnals planes can be targeted,
(as OOB rule specified).

The AAA standard miniature is figured by AA gun, let it be it offense and defense.
It will make sense even for new players.

The preemptive AA should be on defense only, for both common sense/historical purposes and for balance.
It seems absurd to me that an attacking AA division would be able to sneak in and set up an intricate network of AA defense in hostile territory and then proceed to shoot planes out of the sky! lol
Keep in mind, just because it doesn’t get preemptive AA rolls doesn’t mean it cannot shoot down planes, its just now ‘choose your own casualties’

You had reason about preemptive strike.
But why not give them 1 AAA shot@1 on 1 single plane (if any) on the opening round of fire?

This AAA unit will still be much better on defense (up to 3 planes/ preemptive) than attack (1 single plane, no first strike) but somewhat keep is special ability (antiaircraft).

We can think about what it implies on a strategical and tactical level to bring some AAA to get this shot on attack.

AAA will be appealling against large number of defensive aircrafts in a territory but it would be a poor strategy to buy too many of them (same cost as tank) just to get 1 single shot on 1 plane.
As always one A&A principle will prevail: mixed group of units always a better choice.

We can rationalize about AAA unit on offense:
The defender has some large part of his territory invaded by the attacker to create a line of communication going to the front line: an outward bulge, a salient.
To destroyed those supply lines, defending planes are good at it, hence the @4.
Bringing AAA division provide more AA platform to protect this supply lines.
So AAA unit still on attack but protecting attacking unit against squadrons of planes of the defender.

In this manner, it will be a completly consistent AAA ground unit.
Keeping up the same killing ratio vs plane: a 1 time @1 either offense or defense.
But still much better on defense: first strike +2 additionnals planes can be targeted.
as OOB rule specified

To everyone,
what do you think could happen in the overall Global, if any attacking unit can bring AAA as regular unit @1, but on his first round can make a specific @1 attack on 1 defending plane (if present)?

Is this a revolution, which create real unbalancing situation, or just some interesting tactical and strategical situation?

AAA rolling AA dice on offense is too much Baron

Read this again I don’t think you it has sunk in yet

Keep in mind, just because it doesn’t get preemptive AA rolls doesn’t mean it cannot shoot down planes, its just now ‘choose your own casualties’

It changes the game way too much for starters, now you can lose planes to attacking AAA lol
It would very possibly break the game

I don’t see any advantages to it while I can pick out a lot of negatives

Honestly, I’d still say give Battleships AA Guns per your normal, everyday AA Gun rules  1 shot at 1 for each attacking plane in the first round of combat, during opening fire, regardless of how many battleships either are, or are not present.

Or Global SE 1940 AA Guns, per rules.

Oh, and the AA Ability is removed if the battleship is in a damaged state.

@Cmdr:

Honestly, I’d still say give Battleships AA Guns per your normal, everyday AA Gun rules � 1 shot at 1 for each attacking plane in the first round of combat, during opening fire, regardless of how many battleships either are, or are not present.

Or Global SE 1940 AA Guns, per rules.
Oh, and the AA Ability is removed if the battleship is in a damaged state.

First, it greatly depends whether it is OOB cruiser or OOB Battleship which is the less interesting buying.
Second, giving AAA on defense only is still increasing the defending power of a fleet.
Attackers have much less offensive punch, you have to consider this.
CV get A0 but D2 / Fgt A3 but D4.

When I played 1942.2, our Cruisers get 1 AA only preemptive strike but also always destroy a plane when rolling “1” either defense or offense.
In our HR, it was Cruiser which were considered AAA naval platform.
Uk bought many Cruisers to protect against Germans planes.

The 2 hits soaker is very appealling to my friends, we never see the need to add an other capacity to BB.

Maybe you can start a tread wether CA or BB is the less bought and neglect, and which is less usefull OOB, to discuss over this matter.

I agree with Baron. Cruisers need a buff more than BBs

I like cruisers at +1 movement over an AA ability
We finally got that as an official rule too in 1914

BBs were vastly overrated and proved very ineffective in WWII, I prefer it to be that way in the game as well

@Uncrustable:

AAA rolling AA dice on offense is too much Baron

Read this again I don’t think you it has sunk in yet

Keep in mind, just because it doesn’t get preemptive AA rolls doesn’t mean it cannot shoot down planes, its just now ‘choose your own casualties’

It changes the game way too much for starters, now you can lose planes to attacking AAA lol
It would very possibly break the game

I don’t see any advantages to it while I can pick out a lot of negatives

I was aware of the possibility of getting a hit on plane because defender choose 1 plane for casualities.

I’m just saying that is not that so terrible to give 1 regular single attack @1 against 1 plane per AAA.

For sure, it will be an incentive to buy at least 1AAA and going forward to the front against planes put in the front line.
However, I don’t see it as a game braker because many times, specially in Germany and Russia trade offs. The no man’s land is also a no plane’s land. So you can put forward those AAA but it will be for nothing.
The AAA first attack will probably usefull against a large stack of ennemy (in Victory city or Capitol).
In this case, straffing 1 round with some AAA can be interesting.
But does everybody will submerge the battleground with many AAA (at 6 IPCs) instead of buying an Armor (A3D3M2) to get this single opportunity to get down a plane behind the infantry screen?
I think it will be a bad strategy.

More, we used cruiser as AAA platform (1942.2) which can always hit a plane everyround if it get “1”. In naval battle, it was not that overpowered.
In Hawaii opening, I get only 2 shots with japanese, on offense with the cruiser and get something else as casualities because I rolled a “2” or a “3”.

Baron with AAA having an AA dice on attack and with cruisers with AA abilities as you stayed,
It will wreck plane purchases

I certainly do not want this

Just give cruisers +1 movement and could even give them ASW as destroyers do
And No preemptive AA shots on attack for AAA

Players would start to suicide AAA into enemy positions just to try to take out planes

Hmm, I honestly don’t think Cruisers are that maligned.  They get short bombardments and cost almost half what a Battleship does so you generally see many more of them being produced than Battleships, or at least I do.

If you look at historical reality, the Aircraft Carrier would be the ship that would have the superior AA Gun screen.  But since the Carrier is SO well loved and so utilized in the game, I hardly think they need another benefit.  The Battleship is still a capitol warship (cruisers are not in my opinion) and I almost never see anyone but the US produce any new battleships.  Couple that with stories of the Bismarck almost single handidly taking out the RAF for mile after nautical mile and it seem plausible that the battleship would have superior air defense capabilities.

Just a thought.

@Cmdr:

Hmm, I honestly don’t think Cruisers are that maligned.  They get short bombardments and cost almost half what a Battleship does so you generally see many more of them being produced than Battleships, or at least I do.

If you look at historical reality, the Aircraft Carrier would be the ship that would have the superior AA Gun screen.  But since the Carrier is SO well loved and so utilized in the game, I hardly think they need another benefit.  The Battleship is still a capitol warship (cruisers are not in my opinion) and I almost never see anyone but the US produce any new battleships.  Couple that with stories of the Bismarck almost single handidly taking out the RAF for mile after nautical mile and it seem plausible that the battleship would have superior air defense capabilities.

Just a thought.

WHAT? What ‘stories’ were you reading lol

“In the course of the warship’s eight-month career…Bismarck conducted only one offensive operation, in May 1941, codenamed Rheinübung. The ship, along with the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen, was to break into the Atlantic Ocean and raid Allied shipping from North America to Great Britain. The two ships were detected several times off Scandinavia, and British naval units were deployed to block their route. At the Battle of Denmark Strait, Bismarck engaged and destroyed the battlecruiser HMS Hood, the pride of the Royal Navy, and forced the battleship HMS Prince of Wales to retreat; Bismarck herself was hit three times and suffered an oil leak from a ruptured tank.
The destruction of Hood spurred a relentless pursuit by the Royal Navy involving dozens of warships. Two days later, while heading for the relative safety of occupied France, Bismarck was attacked by obsolete biplane Fairey Swordfish torpedo bombers from the aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal; one scored a hit that rendered the battleship’s steering gear inoperable. In her final battle the following morning, Bismarck was neutralised by a sustained bombardment from a British fleet, was scuttled by her crew, and sank with heavy loss of life. Most experts agree that the battle damage would have caused her to sink eventually.”

So Bismarck sunk ONE ship before it got sunk lol
And it essentialy was crippled by a BIPLANE! lmao
What a waste :P

Its sister ship  ‘Tirpitz’ didnt fare too much better.

“In September 1943, Tirpitz, along with the battleship Scharnhorst, bombarded Allied positions on the island of Spitzbergen, the only time the ship used her main battery, in anger. Shortly thereafter, the ship was damaged in an attack by British mini-submarines and subsequently subjected to a series of large-scale air raids. On 12 November 1944, British Lancaster bombers equipped with 12,000 pounds (5,400 kg) “Tallboy” bombs destroyed the ship; two direct hits and a near miss caused the ship to capsize rapidly. A deck fire spread to the ammunition magazine for one of the main battery turrets, which caused a large explosion.”

So the Bismarck class was an epic failure. Massive waste of resources, and on the other side of the Globe Japan did the same dumbassr thing with the Yamamoto class.

Yea, because the biplane was all England had left - or so I’ve been told.  Keep in mind, I am Russian, your stories of past events may not mirror my stories of past events wholly and completely.

For instance, your Patton is considered a hero, but to us, Patton was a tyrant and a threat to the stability of world peace.  We do agree he was a general of the American 3rd Army, however.

(Yes, the victory over the hood is known even where I grew up.)

As for massive disaster, uh…well they DID sink the pride of the British navy!  The diplomatic coups from that alone makes the warship at least partially successful.  However, if you want to compare it to those things skulking beneath the waves and sniping poor, innocent, surface going ships, then yes, treachery and deceit usually beat honor and virtue when in battle.

@Cmdr:

Yea, because the biplane was all England had left - or so I’ve been told. � Keep in mind, I am Russian, your stories of past events may not mirror my stories of past events wholly and completely.

For instance, your Patton is considered a hero, but to us, Patton was a tyrant and a threat to the stability of world peace. � We do agree he was a general of the American 3rd Army, however.

(Yes, the victory over the hood is known even where I grew up.)

As for massive disaster, uh…well they DID sink the pride of the British navy!  The diplomatic coups from that alone makes the warship at least partially successful.  However, if you want to compare it to those things skulking beneath the waves and sniping poor, innocent, surface going ships, then yes, treachery and deceit usually beat honor and virtue when in battle.

Stories? How about facts lol

Bismarck lasted only 8 months while only scoring 1 kill
And was crippled by obsolete biplanes, which directly led to its defeat lol

Those are facts, not stories

The Yamamoto in the pacific is an even better example of the poor performance of large BBs in WWII

They were outdated by the advances in aviation, esp the carrier