Adapting A&A1914 rules for G40

@ossel:

the “no landing in newly captured tt’s” rule.

That rule has always bothered me. If you capture Ukraine, your planes cant land there that turn. But you can land Italian planes there, or even Japanese planes. I never got the fully grasp of this. Everything in a turn are supposed to happen simultaneous. So why are German fighters not allowed to defend their own infantry and tanks in newly captured Ukraine against the Russian counterattack, when Italian and Japanese fighters are ? Beats me.

You could say it is a balancing issue, but then your allied planes should not be allowed to land in your newly captured territory neither. If Germany capture Ukraine in turn 5, then Italian and Japanese planes should not be allowed to land there that turn, since the German planes are not allowed. The current OOB rule don’t make sense.

Luckily the 1914 OOB rules are far more realistic than the G40 rules, so we should start to play by that rulebook, with some modifications to make it fit WWII. Of course the G40 fighters must move 4 spaces, and not 2. But fighters should always be allowed to land in newly captured and contested territories.

@Baron:

My question was more on this line of reasoning about scrambling planes from AirBase for adjacent ground territory.

Is it on this thread that this idea get a first appear?

No, the first suggestions for AirBases to scramble into ground territories come in Larry Harris game design forum back in 2009 when A&A Pacific 40 was released the first time, and people did not understand why only islands could scramble. The designer turned down the idea for balancing reasons

@Razor:

I am thinking among the same lines myself.

DOGFIGHT
Yes, you must fight for air superiority before the ground battle. I think fighters should cost 6 or 8, and att 1 and def 2, both in air combat and later in ground strafing. This will be historically correct. Then the Stuka can hit ground units on a 3, or on a 4 if combined with a tank. And the bomber should carpet bombard huge infantry stacks, maybe like the classic AA gun, roll one dice for each inf, every 1 a hit. I also believe that an airbase should be able to scramble 3 fighters to an adjacent territory under attack, and not just seazones.

You should imagine that the actual OOB fighter A3D4C10M4 was played in the older version more like the Stuka. Because of his high defense value at 4 against all ground units.

The newly introduced Tactical Bomber A3-4D3C11M4 need more fine tuning.

If you want a changing paradigm to develop something new for Dogfight, just put on the Tactical Bomber sculpt the combat value of the classic fighter. Then lower the price and combat value of fighter: to get it cheaper but still effective due to cost reduction.

1914G40 Adapted Tactical Bomber: A3D4M4C10 You can keep the +1A offensive bonus with Fg or Tank.

Left to find some combat values for 1914G40 adapted fighter A?D?M4C?.
Able to do a good dogfighting.

About Strategical Bomber:

If like AAA, @1 it should be limited to 3 or 4 Infantries to keep a kind of parity with the OOB A4.
StB A1(x3-4)D1M6C12, but on every attack each bomber can target up to 3-4 grounds units, if there is less than 3-4 ground units, then it is limited to up to 1 roll/ground unit.
This limitation is for 1 StB, another StB will get another up to 4 ground targets.

And this imply that 1 Inf on a territory, attacked by 2 StBs will receive only 2 @1 attacking rolls.
It can simulates the difficulty of targeting scarcely dispersed troops on a given territory.

Probably limited to 3 Infantries is more balance because 1 StB can sometimes hit more than 1 unit.
And have some similitude with the classic heavy bomber which gave 3 rolls.

@Razor:

I am thinking among the same lines myself.

DOGFIGHT
Yes, you must fight for air superiority before the ground battle. I think fighters should cost 6 or 8, and att 1 and def 2, both in air combat and later in ground strafing. This will be historically correct. Then the Stuka can hit ground units on a 3, or on a 4 if combined with a tank. And the bomber should carpet bombard huge infantry stacks, maybe like the classic AA gun, roll one dice for each inf, every 1 a hit. I also believe that an airbase should be able to scramble 3 fighters to an adjacent territory under attack, and not just seazones.

About this point, there was a lot of discussion to find a balanced cost and combat value I put on my thread on this specific topic, based on a general discussion develop by the G40e thread.

Here is a similar idea to add to your brainstorm, you can take a broad look to find some inspirations (many of my posts doesn’t need to be read in details, too much maths in it, just go to conclusion unless you want more explanations about statistical balance):
@Baron:

All the numerous exchange on Air Patrol and Scramble phase from the Uncrustable’s G40 Enhanced thread made me think about this alternative mechanics to get a more historical/tactical flavour with aircrafts inside the combat phase resolution.

Here it is:
Fg A2D2M4C8 All hit destroy an enemy planes, if there is any. Get +1A/D when there is no enemy planes (Air Supremacy bonus).

AAA as OOB, always make Preemptive strike (before first round of reg combat) vs enemy planes.

Here is my addition:
TcB A3D3M4C10, TBR, paired with Fg or Arm get +1A. Or
Get +1A/D when there is no enemy planes (Air Supremacy bonus).
Maximum: A4D4.

My slightly different version:
Fg A2D2M4C8 Always hit an enemy planes first, if there is any. Get +1A/D when there is no enemy planes (Air Supremacy bonus).

As I said on my previous post, you can see how combat value are reversed on defense vs OOB:
When getting Air Supremacy: Fg A3D3 while TcB A4D4.

This way with Fighter presence, there is no need for a dedicated air-to-air combat phase.
The battle can be simultaneous with the ground combat.

@Razor:

@Baron:

My question was more on this line of reasoning about scrambling planes from AirBase for adjacent ground territory.

Is it on this thread that this idea get a first appear?

No, the first suggestions for AirBases to scramble into ground territories come in Larry Harris game design forum back in 2009 when A&A Pacific 40 was released the first time, and people did not understand why only islands could scramble. The designer turned down the idea for balancing reasons

Sad, it didn’t pass the test.
I find your idea quite interesting:

@Razor:

an airbase should be able to scramble 3 defending fighters into an adjacent territory too, and not just into seazones. And with fighters att at 1 and def on 2, they will not upset the balancing.

@Razor:

AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULTS
I love the 1914 rule that give the defending artillery a preemptive roll against amphibious assaulting ground units. This is exactly how it was on Dday and every other landing during both WWs. Maybe even the inf should attack on 1 in the first round of a landing, since the tanks don’t absorb hits when wading ashore. Then we can have Marines that still attack on 2 during landings

I suggest that marines is able to attack even if the preemptive artillery shot get a hit on them.

But, a 4 IPCs Marines unit (A2D2M1) are a complex matter because you have artillery unit A2D2M1C4 +1A to Inf.
As a kind of infantry, Marines should get the regular artillery +1 bonus on attack, but this put them A3, which is too much.

@toblerone77:

Basically Baron the marines in the A&A series IMO have been crap and nonsensical.  A cost of four is too high in the mechanics of the game when it essentially has worse stats than artillery. So you have to give it an advantage that artillary does not have. Its fire power, mobility or special ability. It HAS to be worth buying and apply to it’s historical role. The marines were powerful because they could respond rapidly via the USN. Making a marine that can do the same thing for more money or less for more money just doesn’t work for me. So I don’t know they have to have an advantage that makes sense. I can add marines for flavor from HBG which is fine. The OT was to design a marine unit which was cost effective and worth while. I personally don’t get overly hung up on absolute balance with this game. I try to go big picture.

So I don’t know I don’t think your idea is bad but personally if I’m buying essentially a regular infantry unit to get a combined forces roll of two or less for a couple rounds I’m not buying. Marines should be cheap and powerful under the right circumstance IMO

Maybe, on first round of an amphibious assault, friendly Artillery cannot provide +1A bonus to Infantry and can be destroyed preemptively.

So, any Marines unit could be immune to all first round’s penalty of amphibious assault. Still getting the +1A Artillery bonus on first round.
Making Marines A1+1(from Art bonus, if any survived the first strike of artillery)D2M1C4.

Maybe you can also considered that any DD, Cruiser or BB paired 1:1 to Marines unit give +1A on first round only.
Maybe even Cruiser and BB can give this +1A paired bonus for the first and the second round, because they have a specific bombard capacity ?
Kind of special support from warships toward “their special infantry units: marines”
This bonus should be given regardless of naval combat action in the SZ.
Here is the source:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22292.msg1101629#msg1101629

Example:
So, even after a naval battle, 1 DD and 1 cruiser survived and 3 marines +1 artillery get ashore after, the 2 marines would get A2 (from warships) and the last will also get A2 (A1+1 from art), for the first round, if the artillery units survived the preemptive shots.

While ordinary infantry would have stay A1, be subject to preemptive artillery fire and get +1 bonus only after the first round.

In addition, if marines are immune to first strike penalty of amphibious assault, it become understandable that during this first round, Marines should be taken as primary casualties in a mix of Marines and Inf invading party.
Because Infantry can only made his attack if they survived the artillery first strike.

Maybe the defending first strike should be extended to 1 defending Infantry unit in addition to all defending Artillery units.
(There was always people in the bunkers waiting the shore invasion.)
In this manner, 1 Marines unit can always be a useful unit (even on a weaker, Inf only, defended tts) to take this preemptive casualty but being able to make an attack roll nonetheless.

Is it enough to justify a 4 IPCs unit which have the same basic combat value as an Inf A1D2M1?
IDK. But I think it is a start.

On Amphibious assault

In addition to the first strike from all defending Art, [and 1 Infantry unit].

You can have this extended penalty applied on first round for all attacking ground units: no applicable special bonus.
So Tank cannot give +1A to TacB on the first round.
Artillery cannot give +1A to Inf. or MechInf
Mechanized Infantry cannot receive bonus from Art.
Infantry cannot receive bonus from Art.

As said above,
Marines doesn’t suffer any of these penalties.
Maybe, to get interesting,
Marines should also get an additionnal +1A during an amphibious assault.
(In this case, however, Art then keeps the first round penalty. )
Able to receive up to A3, combining up to 2 capacities with the basic A1:
+1A paired 1:1 with DD, CA, BB on first round,
+1A paired 1:1 with CA, BB on the second round of amphibious assault.
+1A paired 1:1 with Artillery after the first round and for all the duration of combat.

All great ideas, Baron, good thinking.

To wrap it up, I suggest that all territories under attack should start with a one round air to air combat, or dogfight if you like. Defender should be able to scramble fighters from adjacent territories with airbases. Surviving Strategic Bombers should now conduct a one time SBR on facilities or a one time Carpet bombing of an infantry stack. During Carpet bombing if the AAgun unit miss, then the Bomber roll 3 dice, every 1 a hit, and this is preemptive, the inf are removed immediately. Defending Strategic Bombers originally in the contested territory, that survived the dogfight, also Carpet bomb infantry that attack from an adjacent territory, but not infantry still on the trannies at sea.
Now the bombers land. The fighters and Tacs stay for the general combat.

Naval combat as usual. Planes that was in action during air to air combat can not join the naval battle.

Defending artillery roll one preemptive strike at the landing party, all casualties be removed.

All warships should now be able to do a one time shore bombard, even if they just had a naval battle. If we analyze all landings during WWI and WWII, the battleships were never short of shells, even if they engaged in naval battles before the landings. For simplicity all warships hit on a 2 or less.
Since we now use the 1914 Battleboard where inf attack on 2 and def on 3 etc , we can now make amphibious assaults as difficult as they were in the real war. Let all land units attack on 1 for the first round of combat, and tanks do not absorb hits in the first round, and no combined arms bonuses neither. Remember this guys are wading ashore and need time to get organized for combat.

Marines should hit on 2 or less, and 3 if paired with a warship that can shore bombard. For the next turns they act as  common infantry.

Fighters should strafe land units with A1 and D2, and Tacs with A3 and D4. Tacs should also boost tanks from 2 to 3. But I don’t think air supremacy should ever boost artillery to 4, that’s not how it worked during WWII.

From now its general combat, inf A2 alone, and A3 with artillery support, art A3, tanks A 2 alone, and A3 with Tac support, and absorb two hits. All units should defend on D3 or less.

After every round of land combat, the Attacker should press Attack, Contest or Retreat.
Then the Defender must press Defend, Contest or Retreat. If the defender retreat, he can not roll dice that round, only retreat the surviving units to an adjacent territory that is friendly, and not contested .

@Baron:

My slightly different version:
Fg A2D2M4C8 Always hit an enemy planes first, if there is any. Get +1A/D when there is no enemy planes (Air Supremacy bonus).

This way with Fighter presence, there is no need for a dedicated air-to-air combat phase.
The battle can be simultaneous with the ground combat.

I dont like the air supremacy bonus, but the rest look intriguing.

If fighters can target enemy aircrafts, that will model a continuing dogfight every turn. I also suggest AAguns fire every round, together with the rest of the defending units, and not preemptive, not in land combat anyway. SBR is another business

It will go like this
One time air to air combat and one time SBR of facilities

Naval combat and landing, with defending artillery preemptive fire, modelling the coast fortress, and Battleship shore bombardment

Debarked land units all attack on 1 the first round. Marines A2 alone or A3 with Battleship support
General combat
Inf A2 alone or A3 with Art, Art A3, Tanks A2 alone or A3 with Tac, and absorb two hits
Fighter A1 and can target enemy aircrafts, owners choice
Tacs strafe land units at A3, and Strategic Bombers carpet bomb the infantry stack by rolling 3 dice, A1 + A1 + A1 targeting the infantry

Defenders roll
All land units defend on 3 or less
AAgun roll a die to every plane, limited at 3 dice pr AAgun, the OOB rules,
Fighters roll D2 and target enemy aircrafts, owners choice
Tacs D4 and Strat Bombers carpet bomb the infantry with D1 + D1 + D1

Then attacker press Attack, Contest or Retreat
And Defender should do the same too

I don’t think it will be to strong to let the AAgun fire every round, since its no longer preemptive, and AAguns can be taken as casualties and the fighters new cost will be 8 IPC. Come to think about it, it always was unfair to let the AA gun only fire one time, but the aircrafts could fire every round.

If fighters can target enemy aircrafts, that will model a continuing dogfight every turn. I also suggest AAguns fire every round, together with the rest of the defending units, and not preemptive, not in land combat anyway. SBR is another business

It will go like this
One time air to air combat and one time SBR of facilities

Naval combat and landing, with defending artillery preemptive fire, modelling the coast fortress, and Battleship shore bombardment

Debarked land units all attack on 1 the first round. Marines A2 alone or A3 with Battleship support
General combat
Inf A2 alone or A3 with Art, Art A3, Tanks A2 alone or A3 with Tac, and absorb two hits
Fighter A1 and can target enemy aircrafts, owners choice
Tacs strafe land units at A3, and Strategic Bombers carpet bomb the infantry stack by rolling 3 dice, A1 + A1 + A1 targeting the infantry

Defenders roll
All land units defend on 3 or less
AAgun roll a die to every plane, limited at 3 dice pr AAgun, the OOB rules,
Fighters roll D2 and target enemy aircrafts, owners choice
Tacs D4 and Strat Bombers carpet bomb the infantry with D1 + D1 + D1

I don’t think it will be to strong to let the AAgun fire every round, since its no longer preemptive, and AAguns can be taken as casualties and the fighters new cost will be 8 IPC. Come to think about it, it always was unfair to let the AA gun only fire one time, but the aircrafts could fire every round.

Your getting to a wider picture now, impressive.
I’m not very qualified to appreciate all the details and balance of units.
Glad that some of the ideas has just showed helped you refined your mixed model of 1914G40.

On AA gun and Fighters:
For balance purpose and historical accuracy (1 out 10 planes were shoot down according to IL), making up to three rolls every round is a lot. At least, give AA gun a single roll @1 vs 1 plane max after the first round (even if not preemptive).

Also, if FgA1D2M4, 1 hit, always hit plane first, maybe you can make it a 6 IPCs unit.
Maybe can also allow Fg to target AA gun instead, when no plane.

Your combat system includes a lot of possible planes casualties, this way it will have a lesser impact.

However, you will have another balance issue with 2 places carriers because Fighters will not be very effective vs TacBs. And carriers with 2 Fgs on it vs warships will not get a real chance.
Imagine: the once proud CV+2 Fgs A6D10M2 is becoming a A2D6M2.
This means that only TcB A3D4 will be put on Carriers.
Which is inaccurate historically.

That was one of the reason I mostly keep the +1 A/D Air Supremacy bonus.

I’m thinking out loud here:
If you don’t like such bonus,
maybe you need to think differently about Carrier to keep balance,
make them 3 places instead of 2 planes carrier.

There will be room for mixed cargos on CV:1 Fg + 2 TcB / 2 Fgs + 1 TcB.
3 Fg A1D2C"6"= A3D6C18
Maybe it is TcB which need also a lower down to A2D3C8 IPCs.

Combining three planes will be more in the same value with OOB originals 2 TcBs (A6-8D6 Cost22):
3 TcBs A2D3C8 = A6D9C24  3 Fgs A1D2C6 = A3D6C18
2TcB+1Fg        = A5D8C22  2 Fgs+1TcB = A4D6C20

Don’t know if this unexplored new idea of 3 planes carrier can save the day for Carrier operations…
I hadn’t thought about it while I was exploring Air-to-Air combat and impact on carrier operations with Uncrustable.
But at least, you will know about.
But the 3 TcB will still prevails.

Still thinking about AA guns.

Maybe the price should get lower because planes are getting a lower price.

Once the price on TcB and Fg will be clearly determined then you will have to fix a price for AA gun according to their capacity, rate of fire and probability of casualties costs.

For simplicity all warships hit on a 2 or less.

Since amphibious assault is already not a piece of cake for invaders, at least shore bombardment should be at the same value as artillery: A3.
Battleship is a 2 hit unit, should get 2 hits, each should get a second roll A3 on the next turn.

I think of this number for a first round of air-to-air combat only,
then a continuous aerial combat over battlefield when there is surviving planes,
until one side get Air Supremacy: giving First strike.

1 AAA unit block 1 plane from getting Air Supremacy.
With lower prices of planes AAA could target plane every round (first round up to 3, other 1@1).

Here is the combat value for air-to-air:
Fighter  A2D2
TcBomb A1D1
StBomb A1D0

Here is the combat value for regular combat:
Fighter   A2D2M4C7 when paired with TcB give +1A, always hit aircraft first (owner’s choice), then can choose AAA.
TcBomb  A2-3D3M4C8 when paired with Fg get +1A First Strike (no retaliation from casualty) when getting Air Supremacy
StBomb A1x4D1M6C12 First Strike (no retaliation from casualty) when getting Air Supremacy
(That is to keep balance with the better offensive planes, based on A/D per IPCs.)

Scramble from AirBase will be allowed for up to 4 planes (Fg/TcB).
(This is because of the lower defense value of aircrafts.)

When scrambled from AirBase Fg and TcB get +1D on air-to-air battle.

Finally, for balancing naval battle, Aircraft carrier now can received up to three planes.
3 Fgs= A6D6C21
2 Fgs 1 TcB = A7D7C22
1 Fg  2 TcBs= A7D8C23
3 TcBs= A6D9C24

Vs OOB
2 Fgs = A6D8C20
1 Fg 1 TcB= A7D7C21
2 TcBs = A6(8)D6C22

Maybe Strat Bomber value could be modified also:
StBomb A1x3D1M6C10 First Strike (no retaliation from casualty) when getting Air Supremacy
(The reduced attack capacity received a lower price to balance with the cheaper but better offensive planes, based on A/D per IPCs.)

Now, with these cost and values you can increase the number of planes casualties and still be able to compensate for the lost ones.

And also, the main problem about reduced cost and values of planes which was Naval battle and Carrier operation is solved.
In addition, each full carrier will be better than his OOB counter-part.
But not that much, and it will better recreate the aero-naval combat with a mixed group of one third of Fg vs TcB.

I would just add that the 3 planes Carrier is the real breakthrough here.

When Uncrustable and me tried to develop a more aircraft-based WWII game we fall on this trap about Carrier operation and combat value of a full carrier vs other warships.
We tried to solved it by reducing the carrier cost, but neither of us were satisfied.

Uncrustable turn toward a simple fix: OOB TcB cost reduced to 10 IPCs.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32255.msg1212318#msg1212318
I made “1” roll hit plane for Fg A3D3C9 and TcB get A3-4D4C11.
But neither of us reach the real objective:
creating a G40 with a lot of planes vs planes combat, and planes casualties.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32328.msg1215373#msg1215373
Hence, having lower combat value and lower cost for each aircraft.

Now you get it.  :-D
(And there is a lot of thinking :? in this, be sure of it.)

You will find more about the all this and Air Supremacy First Strike here:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32255.msg1210836#msg1210836

Here is some points to consider if you wish to develop air-to-air combat for 1914G40 in a different direction.

There is some issues in a plane vs plane battle:
1- balance (tactical & economical), an expensive battle regarding IPCs value of units destroyed in early combat cycles instead of later combat cycles,
2- the nature of Air combat phase (ex.: before the main battle or at the same time),
3- his mechanism, (preemptive fire, AAA gun, etc.)
4- combat values of escort vs interceptor Fgs,
5- attack factor of Fg vs defensive factor of scrambled TcB,
6- and any Air superiority and/or Air supremacy effects/bonus on all 3 types: Fg, TcB, StB.

@KionAAA:

Hello Friends

My thoughts to some of the ideas discussed here:

@Uncrustable:

3. Enhanced air units.
Fighters-cost 8 A2D2. On all hits an air unit must be chosen first(choose your own casualty applies)
-Fighters defend at 3, if there is an operational friendly airbase present
Tac bombers- cost 10 A3D3, no SBR
-Tac bombers A4D4 if there are no enemy aircraft, and atleast 1 friendly fighter is present (Air supremacy bonus)

Now we have 3 air units with a distinct role for each:

Fighters: Cheap, strong on defense with an AB (See Battle of Britain), escort and intercept SBR
Tac bombers: Best combat air unit, needs fighters, deadly vs ground units when the skies are clear (no SBR)
Strat bombers: Long range, good on offense, SBR, needs airbase, poor defense

I see your attempt to introduce rules regarding aircombat into the game, but I don’t think they are working.

I don’t think those rules would function well. Let me explain why by first explaining the new situation at land, then at sea.

At land:
In small battles (South france in Round 1, reconquer Ukraine for the umpteenth time etc.), it’s all the same as before with cheaper and slightly weaker aircraft.
In a typical big battle (London, Moscow etc.), the defender will probably have at least 2 fighters. Let’s assume you attack with 3 Fg’s, 4 TcB’s and 2 StB’s (AFTER AAA) against 2 Fg’s, both with large ground armies. Then your fighters need 2 rounds in average to kill the enemy Fg’s so from the third round on, your TcB’s get their bonus damage. But the first two rounds are the most important and from experience, battles are decided within the first 3 rounds (fourth round is often only killing the few last survivors). So the bonus damage comes late and only when the battle is already two thirds over. And this is ignoring any TcB’s the defender may have (that would cancel the bonus) or the damage his Fg’s may have done the first two rounds. And it’s already heavily favouring the attacker (4 Fg’s, 4TcB’s against 2 Fg’s with one AAA hit on Fg)
So in those big fights, your TcB’s are fighting most of the time (if at any time) without the bonus.

Also, fighters with def 3 only at airbases means that if you want to strengthen a defense with your fighters, you almost have to build an airbase. This would be the case for instance at egypt.

At sea:
Here it’s the same argument as above plus:
no airbases means fighters defend always at 2. This, the high costs for ships in general (as normal casualties) and the high costs for carriers to start with means, that fighters are the worse choice than TcB’s in my opinion.
But see for yourself (given CV at 15 IPC):
A) CV+2Fg:  4A/6D/31C
B) CV+2TcB: 6A/8D/35C
Yea, in A) the damage has to be given to aircraft (cost 8-10),
while ind B) the damage can be allocated freely to any ship or aircraft (cost 6-10 except last hits on CV/BB).
On the other side, B) is doing 33-50% more damage at only 13% higher cost. And as all ships are almost as expensive as aircraft, the “hit only aircraft”-rule is of much smaller expense than on land.

All in one, I dislike the rules and would advocate the older rules:

Fighter: 2A/3D/8C (can scramble and escort)
TcB: 3A/3D/10C combined arms (tanks and fighters)

And as someone mentioned the problems with TcB’s beeing to strong on CVs compared to Fg’s, I propose the following addition:

Variant I) TcB: 3A/2D/10C combined arms (fighters and tanks)(both attack and defense)

So TcB’s alone defend quite bad but still as usual if paired.

With these rules, a Fg+TcB-combo has 6A/6D/18C whereas now they are at 7A/7D/21C. This seems reasonable.
With these rules:
Fighters are good defenders and ok at attack, can scramble and escort.
Tactical bombers are great at attacking if paired with Fg’s or tanks, only mediocre if alone.

So TcB’s are good and worth to build (the main criticism of OOB-rules) while the rules obey “the importance of simplicity, meaningfulness and logic” as stressed in the main post.
@Uncrustable:

So far, see you around
Kion

I would add, again  :-), about 3 planes carrier that it will be easier to also get an air-to-air combat in a SZ. Something which cannot happen in 1914 (no carrier, no scramble).

Each carrier bringing more planes, loosing 1 or 2 planes during the air combat phase will not have the same impact of loosing an OOB Fg defending @4, usually kept amongst last casualties.

This air-to-air phase should be part of any combat when there is any plane involved.

If you decide to abandon the air combat phase after reading KionAAA post for something else, here where goes our follow-up discussion:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32328.msg1213380#msg1213380

Here is the combat value for regular combat:
Fighter   A2D2M4C7 when paired with TcB give +1A, always hit aircraft first (owner’s choice), then can choose AAA.
TcBomb  A2-3D3M4C8 when paired with Fg get +1A First Strike (no retaliation) when getting Air Supremacy

I know you suggested 6 IPCs for Fg A1D2 or 8 IPCs for Fg A2D2.
Fg unit needs to be 7 IPCs and A2D2 in order to put three of them on a 3 planes Carrier and be near the combat value and the cost of OOB G40 2 planes fleet Carrier.

Same reasoning for TcB A2D3 at 8 IPCs.

Don’t forget these two units are fighting against Inf A2D3C3 not OOB A1D2C3.

Basic Infantry unit is much more powerful here.

On the other side, Destroyers A2D2 at 8 IPCs can be just too high to compete as fodder and as enemy with Fg.
Maybe it should be lowered to 7 IPCs also so both have the same combat value and will serve as fodder.
It can also have an impact on 6 IPCs Subs IDK.

But clearly Cruiser A3D3C12 would need a cost reduction for sure.

Battleship will be more overpowered (than in OOB version ) by 5 hits full Carrier (2 hits) and 3 planes, I suggested to lower the price at the same rate as you do for Cruiser+1, if you have reduced DD by 1 IPC.
(If, in addition cruiser get -1/-2 IPCs, then BB should be reduced by -2/-3 IPCs).
Explanation: 1 DD+1Cruiser vs 1 BB= 50% vs 50% odds of survival.
It is just to preserve the combat ratio vs cost.

@Yavid:

I really like the dog fighting rules for G40

I hope I gave you what you wanted.  :-D

@ossel:

I also want to work on adding an air superiority combat phase anyway; I’ll be posting my initial stabs at these rule adaptations in the House Rules forum soon.

Hi Ossel,
Hope I gave you some water to the mills.  :-D

If you find I derailed somehow from your intent on this thread, let me know, I will put elsewhere the long posts.

See you soon on this forum,
Baron.

@Baron:

However, you will have another balance issue with 2 planes carriers because Fighters will not be very effective vs TacBs. And carriers with 2 Fgs on it vs warships will not get a real chance.

Yes, I like that, its just how it was in the real war. Carriers had a small fighter screen for protection against air attack, not to sink enemy battleships. Actually I don’t think a fighter can sink any ships with its machine guns. Only torpedo bombers, dive bombers, medium bombers and heavy bombers can sink ships, fighters can not. Was it the UK carrier Glorius that had fighters only, and got sunk by German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in 1940 ? And how many waves off carrierbased divebombers against Tirpitz, before she was sunk by Avro Lancaster heavy bombes. And were it medium bombers that sunk Prince of Wales and Rodney, and how many fighters attacked the battleships at Pearl Harbor and Taranto ? None, only dive bombers, yes. You need a torpedo to sink a ship, not a small machine gun.

It is correct that Carriers become the capital ship of this time, pushing battleships down to a second place. But it is not correct that fighters had more firepower than warships. A divebomber slowed Bismarck down, but it took battleships and destroyers to sink her. And submarines sunk far more ships than planes did. The main difference between a battleship and a divebomber, is that the divebomber come out of the horizon, and the enemy ships are out of sight, making it an air to sea battle. The divebombers torpedoes against the warships AA gun fire. Most of the hex and counter games have different values for a warships ability to fight other ships or aircrafts. But the A&A warship have only one combat value, that it use for all purposes. The A&A battleship hit on a 4 or less to other battleships, subs, aircrafts and shore bombarement. This is the problem.

To the game, to let fighters sink warships is in the same alley as sub attack other subs, which only happen one time during WWII, when a UK sub sank a German sub. Attack submarines did not come until the 1970 s. Down the same alley is the classic tranny that could defend on a roll of 1. Buy 10 trannies, and they would sink any battleship. And a transport sinking a battleship never happened in any war. Luckily that is fixed now, since the G40 trannies must be taken as casualties after the warships.

@Baron:

Don’t forget these two units are fighting against Inf A2D3C3 not OOB A1D2C3.

Basic Infantry unit is much more powerful here.

The true problem is that the infantry use the same combat value for all purposes. It defend at 3 or less against both other infantry, artillery barrage from far away, tanks and heavy bombers high up in the sky. This is to keep it simple. A&A is a game, not an in depth war simulation.

The best fix the way I see it, is to divide general combat in two phases.
Flak, Dogfight and ground strafe phase.
Fighters A1 and D2, can target other aircrafts, or strafe ground units.
Tacs strafe ground units A3 and D4
St Bombers carpet bomb infantry stack A1 + A1 + A1, limited to one die for each unit
AA guns fire at aircrafts D1 + D1 + D1, limited to one die for each plane

All hits are preemptive, so ground units cant kill aircrafts in the ground unit phase
Surviving ground units go as usual. Tanks get a boost with a matching Tac

The same with Naval Combat
Fighters A1 and D2, can target other aircrafts or strafe ships
Tacs, in this case dive bombers, strike ships A3 and D4
St Bombers should roll one die with 4 or less a hit, since you don’t carpet bomb ships

All ships do Anti Air fire. Each ship roll one die, every 1 a hit.

Remove casualties
When one part is out of planes, then start surface combat with the usual combat values