Playing without dice: Removing the luck factor and speeding up the game

@barnee said in G40 House Rules Expansion TripleA Games Archive:

@Panther

It’s so we can upvote when we can’t anymore. An upvote is often used simply as a easy way to acknowledge a post without having to type

See my PM, please.

Also @VictoryFirst , please.

@the-janus said in Classic game using d10 dice:

Attack 2: inf, CV (increase of 1 for both)
Attack 4: sub
Attack 5: arm, ftr
Attack 7: bmb, BB

Defend 2: bmb, trn (increase of 1 for both)
Defend 3: inf, sub
Defend 5: arm, CV (increase of 1 for both)
Defend 7: ftr, BB

Looking at this, I actually have half a mind to just go with 2/4/6/8 for attack and 1/3/5/7 for defense.

Just yesterday I read a chapter on Madagascar in Chruchill’s series, The Second World War: The Hinge of Fate.

I don’t know if you can credit this victory to the effectiveness of marines.  Chruchill considered the operation a great success because of excellent planning and execution.  Using a far superior force against a weak colony composed of Vichy, African natives, and even Frenchmen who disliked Vichy was almost a sure win from the start.

Yes, marines are effective, but they are basically regular troops extensively trained for certain situations.

Any well-trained handful of men could have done the same job given the same circumstances.

I do not want to discredits the marines, but there is no reason why they should be counted separate or special compared to other infantry divisions.

very sorry everyone, we were experiencing technical difficulties today.

Adding a bomber or fighter IMHO would be a great thing to add variety to Russia strategy and increasing its attack power in a long term.

@Narvik:

@simon33:

If you use the same logic you should get rid of the Japanese NOs for Calcutta, Hawaii and Sydney. Not sure I like that change.

That would actually help Allies a fair bit and also keep peace between Germany and USSR for longer on the average. Would more peace make the game better? I’m not sure that it would. It would increase the number of Sea Lions though - perhaps that would be good.

Yes and no. It would be crazy if Japan can squeeze 5 more IPC out of a rocky island than the original owner can. But, if we change the words in the rule, and say that anyone who control Hawaii island and the adjacent seazone 26 with its convoy zone, will get a 5 IPC bonus, representing international trade with South America or something. Do the same with Sydney and seazone 62, and now I can endorse it, man. Now it makes sense to me.

About your other topic, the possibility of longer time of peace between Germany and its partner in crime, Russia, who knows man ? The current OOB NOs sure reward aggressive play, since Germanys choice between a 5 IPC peace NO dont catch up with the 15 + wartime NOs. But, the OOB NOs also make it a scripted game, but not a historical correct scripted game, since in the real war Germany first had to try a Sea Lion before it would attack Russia. Now, since the designer obviously want a lot of action, and not a sit and wait game, he trough in a lot of NOs to speed up the pace. And that is why we can see everything that happened from 1939 to 1941 in the first Turn of any A&A game. But if you ask me, I think its too many NOs in play, it should be max 3 to each nation, and they should represent something abstract like international trade, shipping, oil etc that is not already printed on the map. Actually there are no need for NOs, you only need Victory Cities to win. If Germany want to win the game, it should attack Russia because of the VCs there, not some derogatory NOs.

IMHO, NOs only have a meaning in this game if they are a part of some bidding system.

Increasing the peace time economy with russia (10 IPCs for both) while giving the wartime Leningrad +5 bonus NO to Russia, can give a better balance toward allies while giving more incentive to attack UK early and Leningrad later, to block the new russian income.

@wittmann:

I agree that the Leningrad NO should go. Germany can�  easily capture the city and start building there. Why give it 5 bonus too?

I think that capture a city, or a Capital, should give you a one time bonus. You can plunder a city once, not every day year after year. Now that should put a stop to the back and forth  trading of capitals too.

Iron trade with Sweden and Lend Lease convoys should of course give you NO money every turn

@Hobbes:

@Cmdr:

Or just add up all the attacking planes and divide that number by 6.  11 Fighters, 11 Tactical Bombers and 2 Strategic Bombers = 24 Planes, 4 planes are lost.

The thing with that approach is that it allows for very effective strategic bombing campaigns. You send 6 bombers against an IC on a territory worth 8 IPC or more (on Global 40 against a Major IC): 1 bomber gets shot automatically by the AA, resulting in a loss of 12 IPCs but the other 5 bombers deal an average of 3.5 damage to the targeted IC. You keep buying one bomber to replace the lost one and the other guy has to either pay a lot to build units or abandon the IC.

Actually, average of 3.83333 dmg (3 + 1@5).  Yes, it is effective, but allegedely, no more so than a normal bombing raid would be, at at least you don’t have Yatzee, right?