Convoy Disruption: 1941, 1942.2 & G40 Submarine economic warfare

@Black_Elk:

So say you wanted to make the values of each convoy zone variable…
and you want this information readable at a glance (without drawing on the map)…

As long each sea zone only contains Convoys from a single Nation (e.g only one type of Nation’s roundel), and as long as all roundels have a universal set value (whatever that is determined to be 1 ipc, 2 ipcs, 3 ipcs?) then you could just place multiple roundels in a zone to indicate the value of the convoy.
Lets explore a base 2 system.

For example
1 roundel = 2 convoys, with 2 gray chips, worth 2 ipcs
2 roundels = 4 convoys, with 4 gray chips, worth 4 ipcs
3 roundels = 6 convoys, with 6 grey chips, worth 6 ipcs

In any given sea zone, all the roundels will belong to the same nation, the original owner, (this is a National Convoy system after all) but by breaking them apart into separate roundels you have an easy way to track the totals at a glance. Again, if you wanted a sea zone worth 6 ipcs, you would place 3 National roundels (each of them representing a convoy worth 2 ipcs = 2 gray chips)

‘Why is this better than using a single roundel with 6 gray chips beneath it for the whole zone?’

Because, in a game where convoys can vary in total value, then as soon as the enemy starts knocking off chips, players might forget what their convoy is worth. They’d have to go back and re-read the set up charts. If you allow for replacement chips, then this confusion might increase during the course of play. Sure players might eventually commit it all to memory, but why force that? This method provides a ready way to know exactly what a given convoy zone is worth (its potential Max value) at any time.

Then you could allow them to be a purchasable unit, and a unit that can be “destroyed” in a way that makes a bit more sense to me. For example… The convoy takes 2 hits, and then the Roundel itself is “exposed”! If the raiding enemy nabs the third hit, the roundel is flipped and the convoy is considered “disrupted”. Now the roundel itself is not worth any IPCs, it is not removed.  Here’s the kicker, the Convoy does not automatically repair, instead you can “repair” 2 convoy chips for the cost of 1 ipc! This restores the chips, if the National Roundel is still upright.

This seems a bit complicated.

If the roundel is flipped, perhaps it costs 3 ipcs, to reactive.

Also, like on Marc’s charts, if one of the conditions is not met for the convoy, like the port of origin or destination territory is captured, then you flip the roundel upside down as well, to indicate that.
I agree, this would be an immediate shutdown of all Convoys of a given SZ.

I think something like this would be necessary to make a purchase mechanic work, since the whole point of the Convoy unit itself is just as a means for the player to gain more IPCs at collect income.

The convoy chip is just an ipc in waiting. It has no cool combat value, or any other advantages like the other units do, so its kind of a weird thing to pay for, unless as Baron noted, the value for the investment is pretty good. If you have to purchase or spend anything at all in IPCs, to make use of these Convoys, the net benefit in IPCs has to be a lot greater (like twice the value gained), as an incentive to spend that money for convoys rather than on units. Hence the 2 for 1 repair, if the roundel is still upright. You could cap the total number of Convoy roundels that can exist in any one zone. Say at 3 total roundels for your nation.

You are right. At 1 IPC reward, repairing convoys doesn’t provide any bonus income.
2 IPCs for 1 IPC repair seems a good investment.
It becomes much better if able to protect Convoy a whole turn.
On the other hand, if Submarine is able to destroy 2 markers, this means a direct cut of 4 IPCs and another 2 IPCs to reinvest in Convoy. This is quite the cost of a 6 IPCs OOB Submarine, so the lost of a Sub in a Convoy Raid can be an acceptable cost.

Then if you like, the player could opt to invest in more Convoys, but only up to that Max value (3 roundels = 6 ipcs, 6 gray chips.)

That’s probably the simplest way I can think of to make a Convoy that is somehow “purchasable,” or which can be diminished by the enemy through some kind of attrition. You could pick any number for the max roundels, 3, or 4, or 6, whatever. The idea is that there is some ceiling or upper limit to the amount a nation can invest in convoys.

**I agree. Maybe such UK’s Islands Empire can have up to 4 Convoy SZ (2 Atlantic, 1 Pacific, 1 inactive at Guadalcanal).
But Germany should stay at 3 SZs, and Japan at 3 SZ? while Russia could get 1, or maybe 2?
I’M thinking about Pacific Route to convoy US shippings toward Vladivostok.
Or to cut this Convoy line, Soviet Far East: Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, and Buryatia SSR: Vladivostok, must be conquered.) and USA 2 Convoys SZ.

So according to the possibility of buying Convoy, Axis can get +18 IPCs max boost, while UK, up to 24 IPCs (4*6 IPCs) if Guadalcanal is freed. USA could rise up to 12 IPCs, Russia could get up to 12 IPCs if we agree about a Northern Pacific Convoy coming from USA.
At most, it means 36 IPCs for Axis against up to 48 IPCs for Allies. And this will not be the case at start, since Guadalcanal is a Japanese Island and SZ occupied by Sub, meaning up to 36 IPCs for Axis against 42 IPCs for Allies.**

Convoys can only exist in the designated “Convoy Zones.” They are represented by the National Roundels, with a consistent value (always worth the same number of IPCs/chips.) If you cap the total number of Convoys per zone, and fix their possible locations, it is conceivable that you could make the Convoy Roundel itself purchasable, so you can add more to a zone over time, but the existing convoys are never totally destroyed, just flipped upside down.

Would something like that make sense? YES. A lot.

@CWO:

Here’s a summary of where things appear to be at the moment with the convoy house rule proposal.  This summary is meant to be revised on an ongoing basis as points needing decisions [shown in square brackets] are discussed and finalized.

• The HR convoy system is designed for potential use with any global-scale A&A game, or with Europe 1940 and Pacific 1940 if these games are played on their own.  Separate convoy setup charts for the system will be required for each of these games because they have different IPC structures and different SZ numbering systems.  [For a working draft of what these charts might look like, see CWO Marc’s post of April 17, 2015.]  In the case of Global 1940 (and its two constituent games), the HR is meant to replace the existing OOB convoy zone system.  In the case of the 1942.2, 1941 and (potentially) 1914 games, the HR is meant to introduce a convoy system where none exists in the OOB rules.

• Possible name suggested by Black Elk for the system: National Convoy House Rule.  Rationale: this distinguishes the HR from the “local convoys” in Global 1940.  [Question : Might the National Convoy / Local Convoy terminology create the impression that Global 1940 has two convoy systems, rather than a HR system that replaces the OOB system?]
  I like this National Convoy House Rule. Does National Convoy System House Rule is too much?

- The convoys in the HR system provide extra IPC income, over and above the normal IPC income which the various powers collect. These two types of income are tracked separately.  This tracking can be done with separate IPC charts, or by using two different types of markers on a single chart.  (For an illustration of the latter idea, see CWO Marc’s final post of April 16, 2015.)  The bonus income generated by each power’s convoys is added (at the Collect Income phase of the game) to the overall income of each power (in contrast with the Global 1940 OOB convoy system, which affects the IPC value of specific land territories.)
This must be track separately, mostly because Sea ports of departure and destination must be watch to be sure that all conditions are met for Convoy rewards.

- Convoys occupy fixed positions on the game map.  Each SZ can contain either one convoy or no convoys.  The nationality and the position of convoys is marked on the game map according to the convoy setup charts [which still need to be developed] for that particular A&A game.  Convoys can be marked using either A&A flag roundels (National Control Markers, or NCMs) or other suitable tokens such as the Convoy Nation Markers produced by HBG:

http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/HBG-Convoy-Nation-Markers-X5_p_1821.html

I agree. But Black_Elk have a good start at spotting these SZs I believe. About Markers, to identify which Territory is part of a Convoy shipping line, I think I would use the G40 Naval Base token in a 1941 or 1942.2 maps.
For example, in 1942.2, both Karelia and Archangel should receive such Naval Base token, so when both TTs are captured by Germany this would mean the end of this Arctic Convoy line for Russia. This would provided a direct symbol to identify such TT linked to Convoy.

• The IPC value of each convoy is indicated by placing plastic chips under the convoy markers on the game map (one for each IPC).  The markers themselves have no IPC value; they simply denote the location and nationality of each convoy.  [To be determined : Give each convoy a standard value of 3 (meaning 3 grey chips), which seems to be the current preference?  In such a case, we could dispense with the “Max. Value” column of the setup charts.  Or give different convoys different values, perhaps as a reflection of the economic value of their ports of departure or some other factor?]
  Maybe Country Markers can be enough to make a workable convoy system.

• The owner of a particular convoy may need to fulfil certain conditions to collect the bonus income generated by that convoy – for example, by holding the convoy’s port of departure.  These conditions are listed in the convoy setup charts [which still need to be developed].
  I really like this idea.

[To be determined : Are there certain conditions under which one nation can take over the convoy routes of another nation, for instance in the (potentially) odd case of the Dutch East Indies convoys?  Regarding the DEI convoys, one point to consider is that the DEI are a net exporter of valuables such as oil, and that a DEI convoy therefore technically represents an outgoing convoy rather than an incoming one.  This raises the following question: to whom are the DEI supposedly shipping goods prior to their takeover in the Global 1940 game?  It can’t be to Holland because Holland is already an occupied country at the start of the game…so if it isn’t going to Holland, who is the “pre-DEI-takeover” recipient of the Dutch convoy bonus IPCs?  Black Elk proposed a couple of possible solutions, and based on his analysis my suggestion would be: that we assume that no DEI convoys exist prior to the takeover of the DEI, and that we then introduce a DEI convoy when the DEI is occupied; the convoy would be either Japanese or British or ANZAC, depending on who takes control of the DEI.  The draft setup charts already contain the notion that certain conditions might need to be fulfilled to operate a convoy, so an extension of that principle might be that the existence and the nationality of certain convoys is “conditional”.  Under Condition X, a particular convoy (perhaps better thought of here as a convoy route) is inactive; under Condition Y, it’s operational and owned by Nation A; under condition Z, it’s operational and owned by Nation B.  This system could be used outside the DEI too, but the DEI is a good example for discussion purposes.  Under conditions Y or Z, the convoy would be indicated on the map by the flag roundel (or HBG convoy marker) of Nations A or B respectively; under Condition X, an upside-down flag roundel (or upside-down HBG convoy marker) would denote the presence of an inactive convoy route.]

**I’m following you on this DEI convoy route and gradation: 1- inactive, 2- operational: 1- totally disrupted, 2- partially disrupted, 3- fully shipping: giving full IPCs rewards.

Do you think something like getting hold of Guadalcanal can be a requirement to make the Convoy SZ around this island active for UK?

I’m thinking if Japanese would have had finish their airfield, the zero-planes and Bettys bombers were intended to destroy shipping between US and Australia, isn’t?**

• The IPC value of a convoy is reduced when it suffers casualties as a result of enemy attack.  This reduced value is shown by removing the appropriate number of chips from under the convoy marker and by adjusting the income tracking charts accordingly.  [To be determined : Can convoys which have suffered casualties (and perhaps which have been completely destroyed) be built back up again to a maximum of their original value?  If yes, the details of the process need to be worked out, but one part that’s clear is that convoy markers would not be removed from the game map.  If no, then no replacement process details need to be worked out, and it’s clear that a convoy marker would be removed from the game map if all of its ships are destroyed, since there’s no point in marking the position of a destroyed convoy that isn’t coming back…unless perhaps we’re dealing with a “conditional convoy” as discussed above.]

• [Convoy attacks ('convoy raiding mechanism"), convoy defense (“convoy escort mechanism”), and combat-resolution mechanics: I haven’t attempted to summarize the state of discussion of these issues, for two reasons.  First, there’re still under very active discussion.  Two, as I’ve said previously I don’t have much any aptitude for these topics.  So my preference would be just to contribute some comments here and there on historical aspects of the issues as they’re debated by Black Elk and Baron and whoever else wants to chime in, if that sounds all right, and also to have more expert hands than mine write up the discussion-status summaries for those parts of the house rule.]

Thanks for your helping hands and insightful comments. And this summary, also.

I found this extensive documentary on Atlantic Battle.
It tells the story about the main naval battles occurring in Atlantic mostly between UK and Germany.

It can provide complementary details about this National Convoy Disruption System.
Especially, it shows how u-boat were far more better weapons than surface warships against Merchant’s transports Convoy.

Battlefield: Battle of the Atlantic Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58ogt5zHm0g

It talks about German’s Condor Bombers at 37 minutes.

What do you think of this if Arctic Convoy Route in SZ 3 at 2 IPCs? is:

Seaports of arrival:
Karelia SSR: Murmansk
Archangel: Archangelsk

Seaport of departure:
UK: Liverpool (London)

Allies must Control Iceland within SZ 3 to be an Active Convoy.

Here is a pictured map which showed Pacific and Arctic Routes for US Convoy toward USSR.
Hope it can provides enough detail to choose an appropriate SZ for such Pacific Convoy for Russia.
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/paperno/index.htm

North Pacific Convoy Route in SZ 57 : 4 IPCs?

Seaports of arrival:
Soviet Far East: Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky,
Buryatia SSR: Vladivostok.

Seaport of Departure:
Western USA: Los Angeles

Allies must Control Midway Island to be an active Convoy.

Does a 4 IPCs Russian Convoy SZ in Midway SZ 57 could be appropriate for such Pacific Convoy route?

This would provide a good “in game” incentive for Japan to make such an attack on this isolated Island.
Even if it is not the real historical motive to launch an invasion force on Midway.

Route Volume, long tons*
North Russian 3,964,000
Persian Gulf 4,160,000
Black Sea** 681,000
Soviet Far East (Pacific) 8,244,000
Soviet Arctic 452,000

There is 6 Convoys zones for Axis (gaining 22 IPCs) and 6 Convoys zones for Allies (2 zones for each Allied: 22 IPCs) which are active at the start of the game.
And there is one last South Pacific Convoy Zone (4 IPCs) for United Kingdom which is not activated at the beginning.
Guadacanal needs to be conquered if Allies wants to get this additional zone.

Do you think UK player should get an additional active Convoy Zone in Indian Ocean SZ 34 near Persia (oil and Allies shipping) or Saudi Arabia?

AXIS 1942.2 CONVOY SEA ZONES:

GERMANY for 10 IPCs / 41 IPCs = 25%
Norway Convoy Route in SZ 6 near Norway : at 2 IPCs?

Seaport of arrival:
Germany: Kiel

Seaport of departure:
Norway: Oslo

Finland-Sweden Convoy Route in SZ 5 in Baltic Sea : at 4 IPCs?

Seaport of arrival:
Germany: Kiel

Seaport of departure:
Norway: Stockholm

Mediterranean Convoy Route in SZ 15 in Med Sea : at 4 IPCs?

Seaport of arrival:
Italy: Roma

Seaport of departure:
Libya: Tripoli

JAPAN for 12 IPCs / 30 IPCs = 40%

Japanese Rising Sun Convoy route in SZ 60 for a 4 IPCs?
Seaport of arrival:
Japanese: Tokyo

Seaport of departure:
Kiangsu: Shanghai

Japanese South-East Asian Convoy Route in SZ 36 for 4 IPCs?
Seaport of arrival:
Japanese: Tokyo

Seaport of departure: Malaya: Singapor

Japanese Central Pacific Convoy Route in SZ 50 for 4 IPCs?
Seaport of arrival:
Japanese: Tokyo

Seaport of departure:
Philippines: Manila

Caroline Islands need to be owned by Japan to keep Convoy SZ 50 activated.

ALLIES 1942.2 CONVOY SEA ZONES:

RUSSIA for 6 IPCs / 24 IPCs = 25 %
What do you think of this Arctic Convoy route in SZ 3 at 2 IPCs?

Seaports of arrival:
Karelia SSR: Murmansk
Archangel: Archangelsk

Seaport of departure:
UK: Liverpool (London)

Allies must Control Iceland within SZ 3 to be an Active Convoy.

North Pacific Convoy route in SZ 57 : 4 IPCs?

Seaports of arrival:
Soviet Far East: Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky,
Buryatia SSR: Vladivostok.

Seaport of departure:
Western USA: Los Angeles

Allies must Control Midway Island to be an active Convoy.

Does a 4 IPCs Russian Convoy SZ in Midway SZ 57 could be appropriate for such Pacific Convoy route?

USA for 8 IPCs / 42 IPCs = 19%

Asian-Pacific Convoy Route in SZ 53: at 4 IPCs?

Seaport of arrival:
Western USA: San Francisco

Seaport of departure:
Eastern Australia: Sydney
India: Bombay

Allies must Control Hawaiian Islands to be an active Convoy.

Does a 4 IPCs USA active (at start) Convoy SZ in Hawaiian SZ 53 could be appropriate for such Asian-Pacific Convoy route ?

South-Atlantic/Mid-Atlantic Convoy Route in SZ 12: at 4 IPCs?

Seaport of arrival:
Eastern USA: Washington

Seaport of departure:
Brazil

Does a 4 IPCs USA active (at start) Convoy SZ 12 in mid-Atlantic SZ could be appropriate for such Convoy route ?

UNITED KINGDOM for 8 IPCs / 31 = 26% + 4 IPCs    12 IPCs /31 IPCs = 39%

About a South Pacific Convoy route in SZ 44: at 4 IPCs?

Seaport of arrival:
Eastern Australia: Sydney

Seaport of departure:
Western USA: San Francisco

Allies must Control Guadalcanal Island to be an active Convoy.

Does a 4 IPCs UK’s inactive (at start) Convoy SZ in Guadalcanal SZ 44 could be appropriate for such South Pacific Convoy route ?

North-Atlantic Convoy Route in SZ 2: at 4 IPCs?

Seaport of arrival:
UK: London (Liverpool)

Seaport of departure:
Eastern Canada: Halifax / Sydney Cape-Britain

A 4 IPCs UK active Convoy SZ in North-Atlantic SZ 2 seems to be appropriate for such Convoy route. Don’t you think?

South Atlantic Convoy Route from Africa in SZ 13 near Gibraltar or SZ 21 : at 4 IPCs?

Seaport of arrival:
UK: London (Liverpool)

Seaport of departure:
Union of South Africa: Cape Town
A 4 IPCs UK active Convoy SZ in African-Mid-Atlantic SZ 13 or SZ 21 seems to be appropriate for such Convoy route. Don’t you think?

@Baron:

There is 6 Convoys zones for Axis (gaining 22 IPCs) and 6 Convoys zones for Allies (2 zones for each Allied: 22 IPCs) which are active at the start of the game.
And there is one last South Pacific Convoy Zone (4 IPCs) for United Kingdom which is not activated at the beginning.
Guadacanal needs to be conquered if Allies wants to get this additional zone.

Do you think UK player should get an additional active Convoy Zone in Indian Ocean SZ 34 near Persia (oil and Allies shipping) or Saudi Arabia?

I completely revised this post. It is a summary of a few SZs Black_Elk suggested and a few more from my own research and taste.
To be discuss.

@Baron:

1 Country marker worth 2 IPCs to collect during owner’s Income phase.
(No need to move them, just count which one is face up in the SZ.)

1 Country marker cost 1 IPC to flip on the upright side (because it was put downward after a successful Convoy Disruption/Raid) at the end of the Collect Income phase when the IPCs are calculated. But the repair was paid for on owner’s Purchase and repair Phase.
No waiting until the next player’s turn between repair and flipping, no book keeping: just a flip.
You can put a few tokens in the mobilization zone to indicate that the owner paid for the convoy repair.
In addition, an upright marker makes for an immediate target for enemy during the next game round.
All is done at the owner’s turn. Except, it is just slightly different than buying small transport ships.

1 Convoy SZ can have 1, 2 or 3 Country markers.
If a Convoy SZ have only 1 or 2 Country markers, the Nation owning the Convoy SZ can purchase additional Convoy (representing additional seaport infrastructures & Convoy logistics, Merchant’s ships and cargo) up to a maximum of 3 markers in this given Convoy SZ.
1 Country marker cost 2 IPCs to buy when adding one in a less than Maximum Convoy SZ.

1 Sub can destroy 2 Convoys (2 Country markers) by moving through this SZ during combat move or attacking in the SZ.
Simply flip face downward 2 markers.
1 Battleship can destroy 2 Convoys (2 Country markers) also. Same condition as Sub.

Each Destroyer or each Cruiser can only destroy 1 Convoy each (1 Country marker flip down). Same condition as Sub.
Undamaged Carrier can destroy 1 Convoy per Fighter (or TacB) paired with which can land on the aircraft (up to 2 max per Carrier), if they land on the Carrier which stay in the Convoy SZ or pass through this SZ.

2 Tactical Bombers (G40 but not 1942.2) based on land can destroy 1 Convoy (1 Country marker). Need to attack the Convoy SZ.
2 Fighters (1942.2 not G40)  based on land can destroy 1 Convoy (1 Country marker). Need to attack the Convoy SZ.
2 Strategic bombers can destroy 1 Convoy (1 Country marker). Need to attack the Convoy SZ.
It takes twice units because Convoy targets are difficult to find and planes have a limited time to spent over Convoy for attack.

Maybe land-based airplanes against Convoy can be played as an attack on IC with less results?
Before sinking any Convoy (flipping a Country marker), each land-based plane must submit to 1@1 AA gun fire from AA convoy defense.
Then,
1 Tactical Bombers based on land can destroy 1 Convoy (1 Country marker). Need to attack the Convoy SZ.
1 Fighter based on land can destroy 1 Convoy (1 Country marker). Need to attack the Convoy SZ.
1 Strategic bomber can destroy 1 Convoy (1 Country marker). Need to attack the Convoy SZ.

---

Convoy Disruption in an undefended Convoy SZ:
Warships (Subs, DDs, Cruisers, Carriers, BBs) need only to pass through an undefended SZ,
Planes need to attack directly this Convoy SZ, and, after combat, planes paired to the Carrier must land on this particular Carrier which pass through the Convoy SZ.

Convoy Disruption in a defended Convoy SZ:
When Surface warships (DDs, Cruisers, Carriers and BBs) or planes are attacking any escorting warships in a Convoy SZ, it is a regular combat.
All the Convoys are considered safely guarded by escorting warships. No country marker is flip upside down.

If any Submarine is part of a Naval combat in a Convoy SZ, the attacker can decide to destroy Convoy.
Any attacking Submarines’ hit can be allocated on Convoy, and 1 hit destroy 2 Convoys (2 Country markers are flip down).
(So, when Convoy are protected, Subs must get a successful roll to destroy them.)

However, when all defending escorting warships are sunk, the remaining Convoy stay on the board (no more country marker can be flip down).

Since it was the last post on page 4, maybe it wasn’t notice.
If not the case, then it is probably the most controversial since it talks about Convoy attack mechanisms.
Following the third category according to Marc analysis, it is a mix in which it is possible for Sub to disrupt convoy while being part of a Naval attack against enemy’s escorting warships.

Do you think UK player should get an additional active Convoy Zone in Indian Ocean SZ 34 near Persia (oil and Allies shipping) or Saudi Arabia?
If we agree to a 2 IPCs Convoy in this SZ34.

UK’s Red Sea Convoy Route:

Port of departure:
Persia: Mahshahr?

Port of arrival:
Egypt: Port Said (Suez Canal)

(Of course, if Egypt is captured, then this 2 IPCs Convoy is neutralized.)

It can be possible to add another 2 IPCs Convoy SZ which can be inactive at first for Germany in Med SZ 14.

Germany’s Western Mediterranean Convoy Route:

Port of departure:
Algeria: Alger

Port of arrival:
France: Marseilles

(As per the general HR, if either TT is captured, then the Convoy is neutralized.)

@CWO:

4. The setup chart shows which SZs can contain convoys, and the maximum number of convoy markers that can go into each of these SZs.  Each SZ starts the game holding its maximum number of convoys.  No SZ can contain more than 3 convoys, but some SZs can only hold a maximum of 2 convoys or 1 convoy.

5. The individual convoy markers represent individual convoys.  The convoy markers within a particular SZ collectively represent a Convoy Route.  Each Convoy Route operates under a set of conditions specified in the setup chart.  Under these conditions, a convoy owner (or a friendly power) must control a specific pair of land territories: a territory containing a designated Port of Departure and a territory containing a designated Port of Arrival.  These two ports must both be controlled by the convoy owner (or a friendly power); otherwise, no income can be collected from any of the convoys in the Convoy Route.  Optionally, players can mark these ports on the game map with a suitable marker of their choice.  [NOTE: The details of the setup chart will be worked out later.]

6. Each individual convoy has a maximum value of 2 IPCs.  Each convoy starts the game at its maximum value.  Under certain circumstances (as explained in the following paragraphs), convoy values can be reduced to 1 or 0.  Under certain circumstances (as explained in the following paragraphs), reduced-value convoys can be raised in value, but no convoy can be raised above the maximum of 2 IPCs.

Very good idea. Thanks for making such summary Marc.
Actually I think we haven’t get a clear agreement beginning at the point 4.
I think we need to see what is best amongst the options and find the best compromise between simplicity and degree of accuracy on details.

For example, about 4.

No SZ can contain more than 3 convoys, but some SZs can only hold a maximum of 2 convoys or 1 convoy.

I agree that 3 convoys should be the ceiling, but I find easier for game play to allow Powers to rise up an Convoy SZ which is at 1 or 2 up to the maximum if they wish.

But this is assuming that you can buy additional convoys.

A simpler solution should be to give a fixed number of Convoys for each SZ selected and you can never change that number.
Less freedom but less impact over balance than variable number of convoys.

5. About Port of Departure and Arrival, from some of my suggestion for 1942.2, I began to find interesting that maybe a secondary choice for either Departure or Arrival can be also associated, maybe it is too much.

In addition, I suggested that the possession of Islands groups within a Convoy SZ could completely cancel Convoys.
It clearly gives some incentive which provides a much higher sense of why such Islands can be at stake and not other.
Creating more historical strategic-behaviour from players, due to the higher rewards at stake around such SZ.
I know this can be a complexifying addition, but this can be rationalize as some way that islands airfields and unvisible planes are attacking and blocking convoy in the vicinity of the Islands.

6. About, 2 IPCs, I agree but cutting in 1 IPC or 0 IPC, and convoy destruction should be discuss.
I believe this make thing more complex and less appealing than 2 IPCs vs 0 IPCs flip.
But I acknowledge that it is at the expense of a more accurate depiction for half destroyed/disrupted convoy.

I can’t go further for now, I hope I rise some flags on unresolved topics.

When talking about basic core rules, I’m thinking :what can be a National Convoy HR put in a 1941 game settings?

For sure, the only unit which could do Convoy Disruption would be Submarine.

And, after the issue that come to my mind is: the simplest way to implement something about Sub against Convoy would be on a 1:1 basis.

But, the other issue is what can we do with a complex game as G40 to make a difference between warships?
I suggested warship hit on 1:1 basis while Submarine where superior weapon hitting on a 1:2 basis.

For my part, I would rather prefer a system which keeps the same combat/disruption value against Convoy and escort.

Also, for simplicity, we use the same convention such like 1 National Control Marker worths 2 IPCs.
We certainly can’t give a lot of them due to the very low economy of 1941.

Would you see such rule as already too much outstreched if we would use such scale?

For 1941 1 NCM worths 1 IPC.  1 Sub destroys 1 token basis.
1942.2 1 NCM worths 2 IPCs.    1 Sub destroys 2 tokens basis.
G40 1 NCM worths 2 IPCs.        1 Sub destroys 2 tokens basis.

Or maybe, it is pointless because exchanging 1 IPC to get 1 IPC does not worth such investment in 1941?
However, I see a way to use up the remaining IPC by repairing Convoy with the 1 or 2 leftover IPCs, due to the no 4 IPCs Artillery issue in 1941.

Splitting an equal share of Convoy Zone between Axis and Allies,

This probably means 1 SZ per Allies and 1 SZ for Germany and 2 SZs for Japan.
This can be doubled 6 SZs vs 6 SZs if playing 1 IPC token.

But that could’nt probably go above 3 SZs vs 3 SZs if playing 2 IPCs token.

So, this example shows the issue on a basic core rule which brought a dilemma: to save uniformity or to save proportions?

Where is your prefered option?