G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

@mAIOR said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):

@SS-GEN said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):

What ever you feel is historic. Basically you looking for correct hit status based on Divisions or corps like you mentioned. Ground is a different animal a bit.

hmmmm I am not sure about naval hitpoints. I mean, I keep going backwards and forwards and sometimes I step dangerously close to a CRT… Because I just find the overall attrition rate too high. Star Wars Rebellion does this with the hit markers under each ship but I also find that not very elegant. For instance, things like the sinking of the Bismark or the Hood were not that common and results like the battle of Riverplate were more common, I want there to be a chance of back and forwards and a single battle not being a monumental victory or defeat like game most of the time represents them (kind of because you then get the insane rebuilding economy). What I am trying to achieve (naval for now, land for later) is a sense of strategic warfare like A&A sometimes gives us but other times fails to do.

Anyway, I am sure I will reach a solution… Not sure it will be as simple as I want it to be.

IMO, Axis and Allies is much more pleasant as a tabletop game because of eye candies it provides with all these little sculpts. Especially warships and aircraft on carriers.

On land, I usually use chips for Infantry, MechInf, Artys, but not Tank, when there is enough room in the TT. However, in SZ and Naval, I will never use chips. Just the sculpts.

My personal taste would be to rather increase the number of units but not going into damaged units besides aircraft or Battleship.

US and IJN have a limited numbers of Carriers and Battleships, per se.
These number might provide a level of individual unit which remain manageable.

At Pearl Harbor Raid time, there was no more than 8 US Carrier with various aircraft capacity (before Essex was launched) . I noticed that Light Carriers or Escort Carriers were able to carry around 30 aircraft while Fleet was around 90.
So about one third. For me, this provided the ratio: 1 aircraft on light Carrier, then 3 aircraft sculpt on a US Fleet Carrier.

So, all sturdier aircraft carriers might just hold two. It works on the table top. The only issue is about TcB scultp. 3 does not hold on a Carrier, but 2 TcB and 1 Fg can be put on a Carrier sculpt.

If this can be your starting point, then think about 1 aircraft Carrier unit figures for about 4 or 5 Carriers. Take a look at how many Fleet Carriers were available for Japan.

For instance, 2 US Carriers (for 8 to 10), if IJN gets 5 Carrier sculpt then would signify around 20 to 25 Carriers.

This might come handy if you want to set an adequate numbers for each sculpt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Japanese_Navy_in_World_War_II

@baron-Münchhausen said in G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions):

IMO, Axis and Allies is much more pleasant as a tabletop game because of eye candies it provides with all these little sculpts. Especially warships and aircraft on carriers.
On land, I usually use chips for Infantry, MechInf, Artys, but not Tank, when there is enough room in the TT. However, in SZ and Naval, I will never use chips. Just the sculpts.
My personal taste would be to rather increase the number of units but not going into damaged units besides aircraft or Battleship.
US and IJN have a limited numbers of Carriers and Battleships, per se.
These number might provide a level of individual unit which remain manageable.
At Pearl Harbor Raid time, there was no more than 8 US Carrier with various aircraft capacity (before Essex was launched) . I noticed that Light Carriers or Escort Carriers were able to carry around 30 aircraft while Fleet was around 90.
So about one third. For me, this provided the ratio: 1 aircraft on light Carrier, then 3 aircraft sculpt on a US Fleet Carrier.
So, all sturdier aircraft carriers might just hold two. It works on the table top. The only issue is about TcB scultp. 3 does not hold on a Carrier, but 2 TcB and 1 Fg can be put on a Carrier sculpt.
If this can be your starting point, then think about 1 aircraft Carrier unit figures for about 4 or 5 Carriers. Take a look at how many Fleet Carriers were available for Japan.
For instance, 2 US Carriers (for 8 to 10), if IJN gets 5 Carrier sculpt then would signify around 20 to 25 Carriers.
This might come handy if you want to set an adequate numbers for each sculpt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Japanese_Navy_in_World_War_II

A certain level of abstraction is needed of course but I went with a 2:1 ratio (fleet carriers to light carriers) for flexibility. I am not considering escort carriers as they were not used in fleet to fleet action. Although some could carry 30 aircraft others could carry a lot less and they were not suitable to military operations.

Pearl Harbour is the next scenario I am intending on “gaming” and it would include 3 Japanese carriers with 6 fighters on top vs 4 American BBs and 2 Cruisers (with a similar conversion of 2 Light cruisers to a single heavy cruiser and DDs abstracted).

This will be a great balancing scenario I believe as regular Axis and Allies would not be able to give you historical results regardless of what you did (4 BBs would take 8 hits to destroy and would defend on a 4 so fighters would go down faster than anything).

Regarding damage, a simple solution could be allowing units to retreat battle to absorb hits. So after a round of combat and damage assignment, if there were no hits left to assign and units had their HP depleted, they could chose to abandon the Sea Zone instead of being destroyed. Units in bases would be the exception.

@mAIOR
Assumed there was 8 BB and 8 Cruiser at Pearl Harbour.
You want to do a 2:1 ratio with these so
4 BB A4 D4 and 4 Cruiser A3 D3.

There was 6 IJN Carrier, means 3 units.
If each were 3 Fg on each, it means:
9 Fg A3 D4
6 Carriers
21 hits total
Vs
12 hits.

If you give a special preemptive shot or an additional opening fire round to these 9 Fg, , for initiating an unprovoked act of war.
You might get 4-5 hits.
And you may specify that once a Battleship is damaged, the next hit has to be allocated to the damaged one, or sink a Cruiser.

Just my two cents at how I would deal with it.

@baron-Münchhausen The other reason to represent ships on a 2:1 ratio is that that was basically what a Battleship or Carrier division was. So you get ar,y corps on land and fleet divisions on sea. Heavy cruiser divisions were also 2 or 3 heavy cruisers and light cruiser divisions were 4 light cruisers. At Pearl Harbour there were 6 light cruisers and 2 heavy cruisers so that is roughly 2 cruiser fleets (since two of the cruisers were lead ships of DD flotillas) and if I don’t abstract the DDs, 2 DD flotillas… That might be a good scale) for the American side and 6 fleet carriers for the Japanese (3 carrier figures).

the math would be:

8 BBs on a A:4D:4 2 HP
2 Cruisers A3D3
2DDs A2D2
(and an air wing AND AA defense but I won’t even deal with that for now)

vs

6 fighters A3D4
(9 fighters at 3 per carrier division)

So that makes it on average:
3 hits or 4.3 hits for the japanese and six or nine hitpoints

6.3 or 7 hits for the Americans and 8 or 10 hitpoints of which 4 are “free”.

This means that on average, you would not destroy a single ship while you would get swated from the skies.

If you allowed air wings to take two hits, the combat would go a second round but you would never get the results obtained historically.

The idea of a -1 bonus to die rolls for surprise attacks is a cool one and I might play around with it.

With my changes so far, what you would have on average for the combat however:
American Fleet:
4 BB Divisions each rolling 2 D6s for air defense (hit on a 1)
2 cruisers rolling 1D6 for AA
optional (though I do like the representation of DD flotillas at this scale) 2 DD flotillas rolling 1D6 for AA

you would get 1.6 to 2 hits from AA

6 fighters rolling on a 2 would be 2 hits. 9 fighters would be 3.6 hits.

This still feels a bit low so a bonus from carrier based planes against naval targets could be an option.

It would still not be enough to get an historical result but it is getting there. I can either lower the AA value of BBs to one D6 ,which would remove 0.6 hits so it would make the American fleet get one hit or 1.3 hits Depending on DDs being there or not.

This would make it so that planes would suffer one hit on the AA barrage, and damage 2 to 4 BBs… Second round of combat could see the naval forces destroy another plane and suffer another 2 or 3 hits… This would make that you could destroy one BB division (2 BBs) possibly but of course, a savy player would allocate hits to cruisers or DDs. So the Japanese would damage BBs and destroy a single ship on two rounds But lose as much as half their striking force (2 or 3 planes) and now things would continue to worsen.

The removal of the extra defensive die would also make other fleets more vulnerable to air attack but again, I need to revise OOB on the other theaters which I didn’t get around to yet so I will have to do a bit more work I guess.
This would get us closer to the result.

Anyway, if planes had the ability to soak some hits as well (becoming disrupted and attrition) this would be different and probably a lot closed to the historical result. The Japanese are unlikely to suffer any losses until round 4 or 5 and even with six fighters rolling on a 2, you would get 8 hits in four rounds. That would make the enemy fleets lose a lot of ships. But now the Japanese are a bit too strong as That would wipe out basically all cruisers and DDs and leave the BBs with one health. For no immediate losses or maybe one aircraft loss (and we still need to add the aircraft and the base AA to the result).

If we had objectives to an attack (like, the Battleship moorings were an actual objective for the Japanese fleet), we could say that the Japanese player has one hit choice or two hit choices or something.

I will game this out
but it looks like it is on the right track imho. Then we can play around with surprise attack rules (like enemy units do not get a defensive shot in the first round of combat) and see how it goes.

But that is basically the reasoning behind my proposed changes.

@mAIOR
To simulate Pearl Harbour, you will need a special procedure because A&A is working under the assumption of Powers at war and fleet fully operational at sea.

In that case, you can go for a full combat round without retaliation, followed by Surprised strike type of roll for Fighter.
This Pearl raid is a very special case, similar to Taranto.

Or, if you want to go historical. Pearl harbor was not the most efficient raid and IJN were not willing to throw a third waves against all Fuel facilities and Submarines.
Which makes all the attack a strategic failure…

@baron-Münchhausen I won’t go into a discussion about why the Japanese didn’t attack the fuel facilities and the submarines but it was not in their immediate strategic goals for a reason.

Even if you go a full combat round without retaliation in A&A you will still not achieve the immediate result.

A&As scale a fleet being in port on in the adjacent sea are doesn’t really matter. There are other battles we can use to fine tune naval combat like Coral Sea or Midway even but each has their own particularities. The role of Naval intelligence was huge (hence this all began for me with adding a roll to see if you even find a ship or not).

But even in a pitched Sea Battle, a Battleship ability to swat an air wing out of the sky was certainly not as high as it is represented in this game. Neither should strat bombers attack on a 4.

Update to 2.672

Change Log:

2.672 Adds “Germany 5 PU Controls France RD 10”. Fix Russia being able to move to 8 Sea Zone when not at war with Japan. Adds “Mongolia Boost”. Adds “Italy Boost”. Remove Primitive Terrain from Evenkiyskiy, Urals and Kazakhstan when “Chinese Guerrilla Fighters” is activated. Remove “AdditionalVictoryCitiesWorthPUs_ChangerMustActivateRD3” from Map Option Redesign. Add “ChinaInfantrySpawnBM_ChangerMustActivate” to Map Option “Redesign”. Add 1 PU to Evenkiyskiy when “PacificIslandAndPU_Change” activated.

2.671 Add DDC5 to Sea Zones 113 for Germany and 81 for United Kingdom when “Attack 0 Cost 5 Bomber” is Activated.

2.67 Make China AA Guns Adhere to BM Rules.

2.669 Fix Out Of Box China Burma Road Objective showing up when “Chinese Guerrilla Fighters” activated.

2.668 Fix China AA Gun placing twice.

2.667 Adds "InteceptorDefend2_GiveToAll"to Map Options.

2.666 Give “Slovakia Hungary” 1 PU for “German Boost”. Remove 1 PU from “Evenkiyskiy” when “PacificIslandAndPU_Change” activated. Make China and Russia “Allied” when Japan and Russia are at war and “Charles de Gaulle Neutrals Modified” activated. Remove “RussianNationalObjectives” from “Option Redesign” map option.

2.665 Fixes “NormandyTurnsProAllied_ChangerMustActivate” activating more than once. Mongolia now turns Russian after attacked. Decreases “Long Range Fighter” cost to 12 PUs. Adds “BB and CA 2 Shot”, “Destroyer Cost 6”, “Battleship Cost 18”, “Carrier Cost 13”, “Escort Carrier Cost 7” and “Cruiser Cost 11”.

2.664 Version change.

2.663 Adds Baron’s Long Range Fighter Option. Fixes incorrect Mongolian infantry switch when using “CDG Neutrals Modified”. Change “German Boost” from Slovakia Hungary to Greater Southern Germany which is now worth 5PUs. Add Version Upload Date to Notifications.

2.662 Fix Military Base to only place infantry. Fix no Military Base image for China. China may now capture Military Bases.

2.661 Change “German Boost” to Poland and Slovakia Hungary only.

2.66 Remove “Canada Boost” from “Option Redesign” in Game Notes. Didn’t previously work.

2.659 Fix Naval image error.

2.658 Adds “Charles de Gaulle Neutrals Modified”.

2.657 Make “Planes Target Carriers” also target Battleships and Cruisers.

2.656 Fix battleship-damaged not repairing.

2.655 Replace wrong units folder.

Update to 2.674

Change Log:

2.674 4/24/21
Adds “Normandy Original Owner Pro Neutral Allies”.

2.673
Adds German Tactical Bomber to Romania and British Tactical Bomber to Newfoundland Labrador and Italy has a Tactical Bomber placed in Sicily when “Attack0Cost5Bomber_ChangerMustActivate” is activated.
Changes Canada Tactical Bomber placement to British Columbia when “Canada Boost” is activated.

@waxfingers Hey wax!

so BM rules are included. I haven’t added the Vichy rules from Oztea 1939 https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/32236/oztea-s-1939-global-setup/70?page=3yet but want to at some point. It’s labor intensive and if I remember right there is an issue with the Vichy ships not working right.

Not a huge deal as you can edit, but still want it to be right.

Also want to incorporate Captain’s Expansion rules as well at some point so you can have even more options lol

Anyway, fire away ! What do ya got : )

@barnee

Hi barnee,

Are the BM objectives added as a map option, or automatically later as rounds pass?

I have quite a few ideas, but I will do one aspect per post.

I have not looked into Oztea 1939 before, but I did read up on the forum chat of the link you sent. You explained the Vichy mechanics (if they went into play) and they are similar, but different from the BM ones.

Personally, I was happy with the BM Vichy Rule set, although, I did find that the Axis can take advantage of it to eliminate Allied units without a fight while also collecting units in North Africa (take Southern France g2 or g3). I haven’t played BM all too much, I really do like playing with g40 bids, but I also enjoy historical realism, if it can work with mechanics and balance. That is the key, finding something that incentivizes certain historical play, but has trade offs for balance.

Based on historical facts and relevance to adding some balance/trade offs to the Mediterranean opening and further historical game play I came up with the idea to have a French battleship start in SZ 92. I then went down the rabbit hole of coding conditions based on various historical what ifs. This unit type actually aligns very well historically and is also the perfect unit for balance as I will explain.

Anyways, I have fully coded the following to work. You may know all of the history explained, but I will lay it out for my points.

• Game setup with French battleship in SZ 92.
  Logic and balance note: Italy most likely has it’s Med no Allied ship bonus denied anyways first turn as it could try to kill SZ 93 units but there is no point to risk losses since they become defensive units with Vichy or can just be eliminated for free later. This battleship in SZ92 thus provides a hindrance to an easy Gibraltar take over by Italy, which the game opening usually lets happen more easily than reality was, but is not a block. Yes, you can sacrifice a UK blocker but generally those units are used for Taranto and the other Italian destroyer, if not running away for later. Anyways, this gives Italy a trade off to make as if it really wants Gibraltar it will need to pass on other battles to try to take out the ship.
  Historical note: The original game setup actually represents the ratio of where and how much French fleet there was in each area (reality was 40% French West Africa, 40% Toulon, 20% UK/Egypt/Madagascar). The missing aspects are the battleships that were in French West Africa/Dakar. This battleship is supposed to represent the fleet at Mers-el-Kebir, which comprised of many battleships. The UK attacked this fleet and sunk one battleship with the loss of many French sailors causing a break in UK/French relations. The French were quite bitter afterwards. What if this attack never took place? I have coded various scenarios with the choice of the player’s direction.

• Scenario 1: Italy kills battleship to take Gibraltar. The game plays out normally as it would now whether Vichy rules activate or not, aside from losses and changed moves.

• Scenario 2: UK puts at least one ship (condition) into SZ 92 to sit with French battleship. This makes it even harder for Italy to take Gib, but if Italy does not go for it, the following will take place if BM Vichy rules activate. All other Vichy rules are unchanged. The battleship will be removed from SZ 92 (implying that the Mers-el-Kebir attack has taken place because of the UK unit(s)). There were surviving battleships though, and these have gone to SZ 87 to port Dakar, which is also a place for another historical battle/event. A Neutral Axis battleship is thus placed in SZ 87 defending French West Africa. This is thus a trade off the Allied player has to make on UK1, it benefits one round to lose out in another.

• Scenario 3: Italy leaves the battleship and UK does not add ships to SZ 92. When Vichy activates the battleship stays in SZ 92 but still turns into a Neutral Axis unit, thus blocking the UK from moving through Gib to the Med. This seems like a worse option for UK to take, but it has benefits later on (French not mad at them).

• Scenario 3a: UK wants to get into the Med so has to kill the battleship. This somewhat simulates Mers-el-Kebir, albeit the French are now already Vichy (not historical anymore). Consequences are that the Vichy rules will play out as they normally would with no more additions (I find them quite Pro Axis - French unhappy with Allies). The battleship is removed from the board and not put in SZ 87.

• Scenario 3b: Allies leave the battleship alone in SZ 92, Italy and Germany can use for extra defense. Seems a little too much on the Axis side? Wait until the next condition. If Axis take Algeria (it is Pro Axis) to complete the Italian objectives for all of North Africa then the French feel the Axis are breaking their terms and also trying to get a hold of the fleet in Mers. Instead of scuttling the ship though it makes a run for it to port Dakar, but this time as a Pro Allies unit to sit in SZ 87. French West Africa (if not taken yet) also switches from a Pro Axis to Pro Allies territory and unit (the rest of North Africa, Syria, Etc stay Pro Axis if not taken yet).

• Scenario 3c: Like 3b Allies leave the battleship, and this following scenario can happen independently of Algeria or at same time. If Axis take over Southern France then normal Vichy rules happen and SZ 93 ships are scuttled and all Vichy infantry units are removed from board, except for French West Africa because they are not mad at the Allies so they become Pro Allies (no Mers event has happened). The SZ 92 battleship is moved to SZ 87 and becomes Pro Allies as well.

• Scenario 3bc: The following is a condition that can happen if b or c takes place. While the French are now upset that Germany went back on its word they are still not up for a fight again (why other Pro Axis armies disbanded). French West Africa just needs a reason and contact by the Allies. Allies could take French West Africa in non combat move but my coding is bugged and the Pro Allies infantry unit does not convert, so I made another thing for it to do. If Allies own Morocco and Algeria during French Politics turn then the infantry unit in French West Africa will turn Free French and the SZ 87 battleship will also turn Free French. Again, coding created a no movement issue after conversion, but I just used it as a logical mechanic that they needed some time to figure out what they want to do and so cannot be used that turn. It also doesn’t just throw a battleship against Axis player right away that came out of nowhere, and Allied player cannot use it for extra defense in SZ 91/92 then either. I am fine with having the code fixed so that it can be used, but it works as is this way and I think is fair for game balance.

Below is a copy/paste of the 1939 Vichy rules you mentioned. I have some comments of what I do/do not like about them and how they would not work with my current rules.

Update to 1.87

Optional
Vichy Option
Adds Vichy rules. They are as follows:
All Players start at war with the “True Neutrals”. If Germany conquers France on turn 2, it will activate the “Vichy Option”. After their Non Combat Move, each French territory will be rolled for to determine if they become Vichy controlled or not. A roll of 1,2 or 3 and the territory turns Vichy. A 4,5 or 6 and it remains Free French. The only exception is “Southern France” which automatically turns Vichy. I feel making all territories be Pro Axis aligns with history best, especially with Mers-el-Kebir happening. It also opens up more possibilities to the game. French territory is usually just dead territory, but there are pros and cons for both sides for it staying as French game wise. I like that in BM both the Allies and Axis can make the decision and actions in order to try to stop Vichy from happening, this dice rolling thing just adds luck (not my thing).

Southern France will also have 2 Vichy Infantry placed there. All Vichy territories and units are represented by the “Neutral Axis”. They behave the same as Non-Vichy Pro-Axis Neutrals. No problem with this, I am assuming these are 2 additional infantry on top of the 1 inf 1 art to start?

If any Allied units are present in a territory that becomes Vichy, on their turn they have the option to stay and fight or leave, if possible. The only exception are air units, which are destroyed. (Not desirable but it’s how triplea does it). BM just has the condition that these territories stay French if Allied unit (land unit I think) present. Again, I like that a decision can be guaranteed, unless Axis respond and try to kill the Allied units

At the beginning of France’s 2nd turn, each French Naval Unit will be rolled for to determine if they become Vichy. A roll of 1,2 or 3 and the Unit is immediately ordered to the Vichy Harbor in Sea Zone 93. A 4,5 or 6 and it remains Free French. Seems complicated and unnecessary. The 110 cruiser might not exist after G1, I would not do it for the SZ 93 units, but historically the Madagascar unit could be part of the French fleet that was blockaded by the UK in Alexandria. Meaning historically the destroyer probably shouldn’t be there, however, even though that destroyer is generally pretty useless, it can do special things at times, especially in the Pacific. Losing it as a unit might shift power to Axis.

Vichy ordered ships must take the most direct route possible to Sea Zone 93. They may not attack (Player Enforced) but can defend normally. Once a Vichy ordered ship arrives in 93 Sea Zone, it will “turn” Vichy at the end of the turn. Vichy Ships are controlled by the “True Neutrals”. They are at war with all players. They may not move and defend only. If going through with this then maybe make the units Pro Axis right away to start their trip. Opens it up to historical play out better (e.g. SZ 72 destroyer would just get blocked at Suez Canal I guess like historically. As for ships being True Neutrals while at SZ 93, that one I can agree with.

If a ship hasn’t arrived in 93 Sea Zone by the end of French turn 3, it will not automatically turn “Vichy” if it enters 93 Sea Zone on the following turns. You may either use “Edit” or decide that the Captain has disregarded his orders and has stayed Free French. Not sure how you would decide disregarding orders - likely whatever decision will be helping one player or the other. If the units are Pro Axis on route then Gibraltar should block SZ110 (if UK owned) unit and Suez Canal will block destroyer. Haha now I actually kind of like this travel rule, but only as Pro Axis units. If they cannot enter then destroyer disappears (captured in Egypt) and the cruiser can head to port Dakar SZ 87, potentially working along side my battleship rules. Thumbs up now :)

If Southern France is taken over by any Axis player, then all Vichy territories immediately revert to Free French. This includes any Vichy Units that are present.
Depends, historically the Allies were already coming when the Axis did this so the French were bolstered and convinced to change sides. I am OK with this, but I feel they should disband instead if no Allied presence in Africa. Also, historically the French were still mad at the UK, perhaps if the order of things were different they would turn French.

Vichy Naval Units are rolled for to determine their fate. On a roll of 1,2,3 or 4, the Fleet is scuttled and removed from play. On a roll of 5 or 6, another roll is taken. On a roll of 1,2 or 3, the Fleet reverts to Free French. On a roll of 4,5, or 6, it turns into the Axis player. Adds luck to the game adding change and balance. Generally not for this, but the unit count is pretty insignificant. If the coding works, seems fun and interesting.

If Southern France is controlled by an Allied player (excluding Russia) a roll of 1 thru 5 will scuttle the Fleet. A roll of 6 and the Fleet will revert to Free French. Vichy land territories are unaffected. OK

If Southern France is taken control of by the Free French, the Fleet and all Vichy territories immediately revert to Free French. If France is liberated, all Vichy territories and units revert to Free French. OK

Japan War Scare Optional (for USA)
3 PUs if Japan attacks French Indo China and is not at war with the United States. Turn on in “Map Options” before game start. OK

The Vichy Option is based on Xeno’s “World at War” and how the BM mod addresses it. The French Fleet seems the biggest player in it to me. Italy has a tough go getting to Africa imo. This has the potential to help. It also gives a historical nod to going all “Churchill” and sinking it or turning Axis, only with more success than what really happened. : ) Ah, so I guess I didn’t need to explain so much history :)

At any rate, it’s a Vichy option : )

@maior

Hi mAIOR,

Is it possible with the Triplea code to have the attacker target a particular unit as a for sure casualty (first hits until dead). If so, a “surprise attack” mechanic could be conditional on you declaring war on a country in that turn and attacking. Maybe it would also have to be the very first battle of the combat round to not make it so overpowered, but also aligns with intelligence reports that would have been spread after first attack. Perhaps some sort of pop up window like for air bases scrambling which would display all opponents units and it lets the attacker choose and separate the unit out as a target.

A chip marker for specific places (like reverse kamikaze) with limited amount of tokens to be used perhaps is actually the easiest way to go about this. Any countries and areas that had big surprise attacks would be vulnerable to these tokens, and only certain countries would have these tokens, and perhaps they could be separated out as land vs sea tokens to get more detailed but complicated. This would add some tension to the game for sure.

@waxfingers right on wax ! I’ll have to read through again but do you play on triplea ? Either way it’d be easy to add the French BB.

This is mostly a collection of ideas that people had for house rules. Most people had ideas but never tested them. I decided to try and add them to triplea to encourage testing.

That’s why I appreciate the General and the Captain because of their extensive playtests. Baron and Black Elk, who started the thread, also good testers.

There are others as well. DK tested out a bunch of stuff and came up with his own mod. The BM guys regular kid and Adam tested there stuff and it is quite popular.

The vichy rule is a combination of “World at War” and the BM mod with a couple of my own ideas.

At any rate, as @Black_Elk would say " I Dig It" :)

Edit
yea BM rules are a map option. Some can be added independently if you don’t wanna use them all.

@barnee

Yes, I play on Triplea. That is how I tested the French BB I added.

I have all of the code for the French BB to share if you like, although based on BM coding, not sure if some conditions are shared.

I still have a bunch more ideas, but as I am exploring these experimental mods I see a lot have already come up with the same or similar things. For example I plan to have *fleet" carriers and battleships as two round purchase units. Regularkid helped me with the idea of how to code it as a separate unit that gets consumed like a factory upgrade. So far I have gotten the carrier hull to be on land and then launched the next turn by making it an air unit LOL (because of the carrier being bought it lets air units go in the sea zone for purchase phase), but that doesn’t work for the battleship haha. Maybe you can help with that if you like the idea.
I then thought that the game still needs a one phase purchase carrier, and with research discovered that the escort carriers could fit the bill but that they also were too slow for fleet ships and so I made them 0A 2D 1 Movement, 1 plane spot, 1 hit. This actually makes them work for how they were used in real life in the Atlantic because they can still hunt down subs with the plane range and destroyer movement, especially from a harbour it can hunt down a sub 3 spaces away. Makes them more of a defensive unit. Anyways, I found an escort carrier in the G40 house rules mod, not with the 1 movement though.

@waxfingers right on the kid pretty knowledgeable about xml stuff. Hepps has some good stuff in Total World War

Total_World_War_Dec1941_3.0.xml

Edit
for the two round purchase

@waxfingers yea you’re right about the escort CVs movement. The problem I find with them is that you’d probably just buy a fleet CV instead if it only moved 1.

The price is kinda tricky on them. Basically I see Italy using them the most Sometimes ANZAC or UK in East Africa. Maybe move 2 with no naval base movement ? Or move 1 and Base move bonus ?

The fleet CVs being 2 hits makes them the better buy imo. Maybe drop it another buck if can only move 1 ?

Easy enough to add though.

I’m basically a low to intermediate type player so … : ) idk how it would effect them.

Hmm… think I’ll put it on the list for a map option. Move 1 bonus with naval base. Wdyt ? Might need to lower price a buck ?

Baron was good at crunching the numbers and Elk with strategy game play. I just try and add the stuff to triplea lol

@barnee

My idea is to still have the fleet carrier be the main thing, but it will now require at least a turns thought (it does not need to launch the next turn, but at least an order has to be put in a previous turn). This 2 round purchase unit thinking is a big change though. To make the change less drastic and accommodate a scenario when you need to quickly build a defensive carrier or lander I put in the escort carrier. Keeping to their abilities though and to not make them be the main conquering ship I really liked the 1 move, 2 with harbour.

@waxfingers

I at first was thinking it would be 7 bucks, not half of a carrier (8) and with shipyards it would be 6, (13 is carrier with shipyard).

I wondered if a 14 buck carrier no free hits and 1+1 movement would be used instead, but I don’t think so. The movement thing I think would make people stick to reality, not to mention free soaked hits. Escort carriers were actually much cheaper than this comparatively to fleet carriers (more like 1/3 to 1/4 cost), probably because they used other older ship hulls to begin with. But that would be too game breaking.

@waxfingers cool yea check out Hepps TWW I linked earlier. He has you buy a “Hull” and then you “Upgrade” to a CV or BB which cost more. Takes an extra turn. Can’t just buy one outright

I think that’s what you’re looking for or at least similar.

@barnee

Ah, great yes, pretty much that is what I am looking for. Although I am for letting it stay in the factory and placed in a later round but that was just my initial thoughts, not from play testing. Might be an issue with allowing placement later because if you have enough money you could maybe “bank” hulls (costing half) and then just pop out with them when it is beneficial to you. But on the flip side I wondered if you prepared a hull, would a close enemy then just build stuff to target it down when it pops out next turn (UK/Germany).

@waxfingers yea I think the Hulls are independent so until you upgrade , they’d stack up. Not super familiar with the game, so idk for sure