Sometimes I really wish we could design a scenario from the ground up, to test out your unit values ideas Baron! I have this feeling, like if we could just get the right roster balance and consider the starting unit placements and map design from scratch, we could make a really fun A&A variant.
I’m always torn between the ideas in my head, and what I think I can persuade people in my playground to try haha. Always with that tension between the desire to try something new, and the desire to play what’s familiar. For me there are a couple possibilities that I find intriguing about lowering the cost of defenseless transports. But one that I especially dig is the idea of an Axis squeeze that can somehow find a target other than Moscow.
Moscow is straightforward, easy to execute, and has been the standard going back to Classic. For an alternative to ever work, e.g. Crush London, or Crush Washington, then Axis need a viable attack route across the water.
The concept of a German naval expansion, or a Japanese option transport option for invasion USA, might both be workable, if transports weren’t so damned expensive. Right now neither of those attack routes are workable. Even if Axis dedicate everything to the effort, they can either develop the surface fleet, or the transport capacity necessary to pull it off, but never both. Or at least, never both until Moscow is already defeated.
But I had this sort of gamey idea, what if Axis could conceivably kill any one of the 3 Allies, if they totally ignore the others and do a full press.
This is basically what happens right now to Russia in every game, but it’s not inconceivable to work it such that if Japan and Germany throw everything at either UK or USA, that they might be able to achieve something similar. There are two difficulties with that though, first Russia has no good way to “go monster” and take Germany by itself without coordination by UK/USA fighters, and second because the cost of transports is prohibitive.
Its not that the Axis production spread too terribly off target. Germany has UK outclassed in production, and Japan could conceivably build enough production to match the total US output of North America. But neither Axis player transport enough of it to do any good. USA beginning with the strong production advantage that it does, never has to really put stock much stock in a West Coast invasion threat. And UK is built out to defend against Sea Lion fairly easily. Really all it takes is a single Russian fighter in position to fly to London.
Of course then there’s also the issue of both Axis players just using those cheaper transports to hammer Russia, which is what would likely happen anyway, because we’re all so well trained to gun for the center by now haha.
But yeah, it is a bit of a dream. Its hard to make these numbers fit on an existing board, but I think a naval expansion for A&A would be cool.
I think the real limiting factor for the cost and prevalence of ships, is that the unit sculpts are more expensive to produce, larger and weightier. But even then, the game maker has the sense to put in more ships than can ever be used (with all those Russians.) Even with a redesigned economy (some sort of bonus) or a few more starting units, the Russians will never build any of those warships haha. But just looking at them is like a tease. Or a challenge. Or say you buy two copies of the gameboard, like most of us end up doing, and you just stare at all those ship sculpts that never get purchased. Cruisers and battleships and the like. I just start to pine for a map that was more geared towards the naval purchase. 1942.2 doesn’t have any built-in ways to tweak the cost of units, like technology, so that HRs would be the only way to really get there.
I just like the idea of having the 5 spot returned to the roster, but be on the water, as a way to encourage naval builds. I also have this feeling, that the idea of a cheaper defenseless transport might be easier to adopt than a return to transport defense. Sure I sometimes pine for the classic defensive dynamic, but after playing classic and revised again after going defenseless for so long, it does have a way of giving you the brain freeze. If the replacement cost was cheaper, I don’t think the defenseless transport would seem like such a drag (with its infinite auto kill, no hostile sz and all the rest). Going down -2 would probably be too much for everyone to get behind, but dropping it by 1 ipc might find some takers.
It might also make the half loaded transport seem less of a drag for the cost, like you’re just wasting them, or perhaps encourage more transport fanning where you cast a wide net expecting the units to be destroyed but taking land in the process.
Subs at 5?
Transports at 6?
G1 would allow for 6 transports.
J1 would allow for 5 transports.
Too overpowered? Sea Lion might be back on the table for G. Japan is still limited by its total production and the location of its starting infantry.
The sub spam would definitely be more wild. USA and Germany could both build 8, UK and Japan could both build 6 at their starting income value. Russia could spam 4, though that’d never happen hehe.
I think the advanced shipyards structure might work. It favors Allies sure, but the board so far favor Axis OOB, so there is some balance to offset. But Axis would still have some options too, so its not just a totally one sided boon. I think it might work.
The values that Argothair suggested the smaller vessels seem achievable. -1 ipc in cost… if you want to go that route. If not you can keep those all the same as OOB.
For the capital ships -2 ipcs in cost is pretty easy to remember.
Cruiser -2 = 10 ipcs
Carrier -2 = 12 ipcs
Battleship -2 = 18 ipcs
Its a start at least. Going lower even lower for those is still an option if one wished. Like -3 for capital ships “Advanced shipyards style” if desired.
:-D