Delta Deck: cards for playing G40 Delta house rules

@crockett36

Tokyo express does not need a marine. 1 infantry on Japanese destroyers.

In my opinion, the ultimate expression of anti-aircraft cruiser was built too late for the war: the US Navy’s Worcester class cruisers. Six twin-gun 6" turrets, with semi-automatic loading. They were capable of launching 144 rounds a minute at maximum rate of fire (12 rounds / minute per barrel, 12 barrels). Or, put another way, each of those 144 shells weighed 105 to 130 lbs, for a mass of about 7 1/2 tons of steel and explosives launched in the air. Every minute. I mean, when you’re done messing with Kamikazes…

Just, not commissioned until 1948…

-Midnight_Reaper

@SouthsideCH:

It seems every time we play there are certain things we just don’t understand. While we understand the rules sometimes they just do not seem rational.

Does anyone have house rules addressing the following?

Artillery supporting infantry during an amphibious assault.

If I move a sub or a destroyer-less navy into a convoy sea zone, forcing the enemy to submerge, why can they convoy me?

It does not make much sense that scramblers are defenders, especially in some cases involving tac bombers.

I get that Kamikaze attacks have to choose their target. But if I bring in 3 cruisers, 2 battleships and a carrier and they choose to hit the battleships, shouldn’t the cruisers get to bombard? They can’t take part in the defense against the Kamikaze.

Convoy Disruption seems easy. There are no ill effects to the disruptor. If you can intercept when facilities are being attacked it makes sense a navy in that sea zone should be able to do the same.

I would love to hear some input on these as well as any house rules ideas.

In terms of house rules, are you looking for balance or realism?

I always argue realism before balance so.

1:No, Artillery should not be able to support infantry during sea invasion, that’s why battleships should be used.

2:I argue they should. The sea territory is vase and submarines are loved during WWII because they are a pain to track down, they are basically the naval sniper.

3: I am not sure the exact issue. Fighters and Tacts can be used offensively and scramble protects your navy. I personally think all allied aircraft should scramble regardless of what nations navy is being attack as long as the nations allows it.

4: Kamikaze wings traditionally went after Battleships and Aircraft Carriers first because taking those out would give the IJN fairness as the IJN had a lot of smaller ships. I personally think Kamikaze wings should also be allowed to target transports.

5: So what’s the issue with Convoy Raids then? It makes you force yourself to deal with an enemy navy.

This topic is specifically to list house rules for units in whatever Axis and Allies game intended for. Please however list said game for a particular collection for clarification, the text enlarged and bolded.

Axis and Allies Global

Cruiser - Attack: 3, Defense: 3, Movement: 3, Cost: 11, Special: Can bombard during an Amphibious Assault per Transport.

Tactical Bomber - Attack: 3, Defense: 3, Movement: 4, Cost: 10, Special: Can Attack at 4 when paired with a Tank or Fighter, Can damage Air Bases and Naval Bases.

Strategic Bomber - Attack: 4, Defense: 1, Movement: 6, Cost: 11, Special: Can damage any Facilities, may only Attack at 2 against Naval Units, add 2 in damage if originated from an operational Air Base.

Anti-Aircraft Artillery - Attack: -, Defense: -, Movement: 1, Cost: 6, Special: During the first round for combat (attacking or defending), it may shoot up to 3 Air Units, if any are 1, said unit is destroyed and may not fire back, may not be used in additional combat rounds except as a casualty.

Here is a rough for the victory points on my map. It may not work with OOB rules but I’m working on two sets of rules to be used with OOB and another with extra pieces. Link for the map is here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38048.0

Number axis have for allied win – historical number – number for axis to win
        Europe pacific global
Turn4 Jun 42 23-31-39 12-18-24 35-49-63
Turn5 Dec 42 24-32-40 12-18-24 36-50-64
Turn6 Jun 43 21-29-37 11-17-23 32-46-60
Turn7 Dec 43 15-23-31 9-15-21 24-38-52
Turn8 Jun 44 12-20-28 7-13-19 19-33-47
Turn9 Dec 44 3-11-19 3-9-15 6-20-34
Turn10 Aug 45 0-(3)-11 1-(7)-13 0-(7)-21
Over Time         Lose-win
Turn11 Dec 45 0-8 0-6 0-14
Turn12 Jun 46 0-8 0-6 0-14
Turn13 Dec 46 0-8 0-6 0-14
Turn14 Jun 47 0-8 0-6 0-14
Turn15 Dec 47 0-8 0-6 0-14
Optional: Japan surrenders if they have 40 or less income after turn 9 and the factory in japan is bombed to its maximum hit points.

@knp7765:

That is a good idea about limiting the Japanese Kamikaze use until they are kind of pounded down to a low income. The Kamikaze was a weapon born out of desperation after all.

Yes, and in addition to the pressure of Japan being in such a desperate situation, there was another related factor at play: the more the war progressed, the fewer top-notch pilots Japan had at its disposal.  Japan’s training philosophy prior to the war had produced an elite corps of pilots, which gave Japan an initial advantage but left it in a worsening position as the years went by and their casualties mounted.  The US Navy, by contrast, figured out that training large numbers of competent pilots was a better investment than training a small number of superb ones (especially since the US could produce enough aircraft to take advantage of its abundant pilot supply).  When Japan’s situation became dire enough in late 1944 for it to consider extraordinary measures such as kamikaze tactics, one element which worked in favour of the kamizaze concept was that it required very little pilot training: the pilots basically just had to learn how to take off, how to fly to their targets and how to go into a steep dive.  This kind of rudimentary flight instruction was the opposite of the elite-oriented training philosophy Japan had followed prior to the war, so it would make sense to have a rule saying that Japan can only make kamikaze attacks late in the game once Japan is on the ropes.  Maybe this could even be seen as a kind of tech – a capability which isn’t available at the start of the game, but which becomes available later when certain conditions are met.  With a normal tech, you need to invest money to gain the new capability; in this case, kamikaze attacks (a kind of reverse tech because it reflects a training downdgrade) would become available when Japan’s economic and strategic situation drops below a certain threshold.

its another house rule that I had dug up in another forum that allows artillery to “shell” or bombard an adjacent territory for 1 ipc per shot

This would be more appopriate here.

I’ve played with No table talk before.  Kinda fun.

We’d do 10 Min strat sessions at the end of each rd.

EDIT:

IL, I hope that is a joke.
but you might want to be carfeul there.