G40 Redesign (currently taking suggestions)

@Baron:

So, your DD blocks/detects on 1:3 ratio, while mine is at the lower 1 DD:1 Sub ratio blocks/detects.

Yes, but maybe we are going to change this ratio to 1:1…

@Baron:

And as OOB, in the example, if all 6 Fighters and 1 DD gets 4 hits, even if there is 3 detected Subs and 1 unsubmerged but undetected sub, it would be sunk too. Right?

Not necessarily, but in this case, yes.
Since aircraft can only score hits on detected subs, you have to seperate the rolls of the DD and the fighters. A hit caused by the DD can be taken by any SS (owner of the SS’s choice) and a’Ftr-hit’ may be assigned only to the three detected Subs.
(According to the way A&A is played in our Group, the ‘Ftr-hit’s’ must be assigned first.)

My understanding was subs preferred to take out merchant ships with their deck gun so they could preserve torpedos. When facing a warship they would attack submerged. I’m sure there were exceptions.

So if the non detected sub scores on it’s first strike the DD dies and it and the planes can’t shoot at anything ? Otherwise the planes get at least one round to shoot at the other 3 ?

Here is a schematic NO which can be use for either Germany or USA:
+5 IPCs if at least 1 enemy’s Convoy SZ is disrupted.
+10 IPCs if 2 different enemy’s Convoy SZ is disrupted. Not two SZs from the same enemy.
Example: Germany disrupting 1 UK and 1 US SZ gives 10 IPCs. US disrupting Japan and Italy gives 10 IPCs.
At 5 IPCs, it can replace 1 lost Sub.

Another NO for PTO, Japan and USA.
+3 IPCs per Pacific islands conquered during the turn.
Basically an incentive to do continuous Island hopping.

Maybe all these NO can become universal objectives bonus?
So Anzac and UK pacific can also do them.
Or UK and Italy on Convoy raiding.

Island hopping NO sounds interesting. Would that be for the valueless islands only or all ? I would think the former as the latter already have incentive to be attacked. You could add the 1 dollar ones too.

@Baron:

You unveiled some valid points, here too.
Axis and Allies on water can become a kind of Risk staking strategy. In PTO, US vs Japan, I don’t know if there is a way to not come to this strategy with Dead-zoning many SZs with 1 big stack of warships.

I think there is a better chance of fostering this in the Pacific, mostly because there are more sea zones to use and (possibly) more objectives to cover. This could necessitate the spreading of forces. I don’t know how it would work out though.

@Baron:

About Jen Sub rule, I don’t believe this situation occurs so often. And it occurs mostly because TPs and Subs cannot control SZ and affect each other (except now, with OOB 2nd Ed rule, which forbid unescorted TP to unload in a Sub infested SZ.

No, I don’t think it occurs often either. Transports are rarely left unprotected or even under-protected. However, I would modify Jen’s rule to allow shots at any passing ships (not just transports). This would be a one-shot per sub. The passing ships may only defend with any destroyers present in their fleet (again, just one shot). Those subs that survive simply submerge and the fleet continues on. This makes subs more useful, dangerous and doesn’t subject them to being totally wiped out by engaging a larger fleet and letting all the ships defend. This does not mean that subs become blockers because the ships  continue on their mission as if nothing happened. It is kind of like AA fire, but in the water. Amphib assaults could still be made in a SZ containing enemy subs, you just do this combat first.

@Baron:

If changing for allowing each Sub to make a single roll @1 against trespasser in their SZ would probably put an end to the maneuver above and become a direct attack on Subs on the path.

It could. Meaning it might make people want to group ships even more to defend against this ability. But subs won’t get an all out attack; it will only ever be 1 shot per sub. So the net effect will be the same if you have 2 ships in your fleet or 20 ships. We could even say, not to exceed the number of ships in the passing fleet. So if you have 3 subs and there are only 2 enemy ships, the subs only get 2 shots. I don’t know.

@Baron:

2 or 3 Subs can become virtual blockers.

Virtually, I suppose. It will be up to the other person to decide if it is worth the risk. The point is that they are not legitimate blockers and passage is still possible. Again, I liken it to AA shots for the water. Although it is more like the old way of playing with AA; any territory you flew over could shoot, not just the one you were attacking. That isn’t realistic for air combat, but it is realistic on the water. This may foster more destroyer buying since destroyers will be the only ones that can defend.

@Baron:

I’m not against it, I only wonder if adding this not so complex rule is aiming at the goal. You are a more experienced player than I am, so I let it to your judgement. If you think so, then I agree.

Depends what the goal is. If it is to make subs more useful then I definitely think this is the way to go. However, if people generally think they are fine with the mechanics as they stand OOB then there is no reason to adopt the rule. Interdiction is a rule that will help Germany and the US in particular. It could have larger effect for Italy because they are a maritime power who is cash strapped. Since a sub is the cheapest option, this may be a huge boon to their war effort assisting Germany.

As for my experience… I have been playing for 11 years or so, but I am definitely not a guru. I haven’t “scienced the $#!&” out of this game like some people have, I tend to just make observations based on personal experience. But I like tinkering with the rules in hopes of improving something. Ultimately, adoption for a lot of these modifications will have to be on an individual basis. There are few things that everyone will agree on as something they want to use.

@barney:

My understanding was subs preferred to take out merchant ships with their deck gun so they could preserve torpedos. When facing a warship they would attack submerged. I’m sure there were exceptions.

I think it depended on the tactical situation at hand, but yes. My point was that even at periscope depth (for attack) a sub was not truly submerged. They were still very near the surface, could be seen, depending on the conditions and were therefore more vulnerable to attack.

@LHoffman:

It depends what you mean by submerged… […] Most of a sub’s combat was conducted either at periscope depth…

This is exactly what I mean by “submerged”.
Since the best (or only) way to detect a submerged sub is by sonar, such a sound impulse would warn a targeted sub and only gave them two choices: to dive as deep as possible or to go on an Evasion course; both in the hope of not being hit by the enemy. Since it is not very easy to hit a submerged sub by a depth charge, I assume it nearly impossible to kill it by a Torpedo.

According to the possibility that a sub could be seen if it operates on periscope depth, I bet they would break off the action due to their vulnerability to surface ships, especially destroyers, and their depth charges. (Always depending upon the tactical situation, of cause.)

Maybe my view about submarine-warfare in WW2 is influenced a bit too much by the movie “Das Boot”.

@The:

Maybe my view about submarine-warfare in WW2 is influenced a bit too much by the movie “Das Boot”.

That is definitely not a bad thing. Das Boot has the reputation of being the most realistic cinematic portrayal of WWII submarine warfare. It is a great movie to be sure. It has been a while since I watched it, but I believe that both of our statements reflect how they fought battles: either periscope depth or on the surface. As I recall the only time they were really submerged in battle is when they were running or hiding from enemy destroyers. I think they would fire torpedoes from periscope depth and then dive to avoid any approaching ships. They would listen for timed explosions to know if they hit their targets.

@LHoffman:

@The:

Maybe my view about submarine-warfare in WW2 is influenced a bit too much by the movie “Das Boot”.

That is definitely not a bad thing. Das Boot has the reputation of being the most realistic cinematic portrayal of WWII submarine warfare. It is a great movie to be sure. It has been a while since I watched it, but I believe that both of our statements reflect how they fought battles: either periscope depth or on the surface. As I recall the only time they were really submerged in battle is when they were running or hiding from enemy destroyers. I think they would fire torpedoes from periscope depth and then dive to avoid any approaching ships. They would listen for timed explosions to know if they hit their targets.

WWII German diesel-electric subs, like most subs of that era, were “diving boats” or “submersible boats” rather than true submarines.  They submerged when it was useful for them to do so – chiefly to escape enemy destroyers or enemy aircraft – but there were many factors which encouraged them to operate on the surface as much as possible.  First, they had to do so to recharge their electric motors (unless they had a snorkel, a device which created problems of its own).  Second, they were faster on the surface than submerged (unlike modern nuclear subs, whose hydrodynamic shape makes them faster submerged than surfaced).  The speed disadvantage of being submerged made it more difficult for them to line up for a torpoedo underwater; a surfaced U-boat was often faster than a cargo ship, but not necessarily a submerged one.  Third, as has been mentioned, surface attacks against defenseless transports (to, um, coin a phrase) gave the U-boat commander the option to use his deck gun rather than an expensive torpedo…though crewmembers were always glad to unload a bulky torpedo because they were so squeezed for space.  Fourth – and this is where the British ran into serious trouble in the early years of the war – nighttime surface attacks by U-boats were very hard to defend against prior to about 1942.  The British had assumed prior to WWII that ASDIC (aka sonar) would solve the submarine problem…but that was based on the assumption that U-boats would attack convoys while submerged.  Doenitz realized that a surfaced U-Boat could not be detected by sonar (whether by day or by night) and that a surfaced U-Boat could not be detected visually at night (unless a convoy starts firing star shells, which of course no convoy commander in his right mind would do unless he’s already under attack because it would give away the convoy’s position).  And crucially, early long-wave British radars were too coarse to pick the small echo of a surfaced U-boat out of the surrounding surface clutter of the waves.  It was only around 1942, when centimetric radar became more widely available, that escorts were finally able to detect a surfaced U-boat at night.

@barney:

Island hopping NO sounds interesting. Would that be for the valueless islands only or all ? I would think the former as the latter already have incentive to be attacked. You could add the 1 dollar ones too.

If all islands on Pacific map can be fight for 3 IPCs plus any regular IPCs value on the TTy, this can create much more skirmishes at sea also: less 1 pack only fleet.

And maybe a small Task force such as 2 Cruisers, 1 Transport and 1 Destroyer, able to move 3 spaces anywhere can be useful to fight over lesser strategic objectives, but still worth some economic reward, such as 3 IPCs per conquered island each turn.

Note: any unconquered or uncontested island gives nothing more than TTy value to the owner.

I prefer 1 general rule over exception such as money islands worth x, 1 IPCs island worth y and 0 IPC island worth z.

Been a bit since I could go through the thread…sorry.  Few ideas based on what I skimmed:

What if we gave Aircraft Carriers AA abilities (after all, they were bristling with AA Guns.)  Each carrier gets 3 AA Gun shots per normal AA Gun rules (so if you have radar, that’s @2, else it’s @1, first round only, opening fire.)  Boost the cost of the Carrier if need be to balance it out.

Transports:  Cost 7, Move 2, Attack 0, Defend 0, Must be last units selected as casualties after all other potential units are hit (if you bring them in with attackers - as you would for amphibious - then any defense shots in excess of what is needed to sink the accompany ships MUST be applied to any transports until all shots are accounted for or there are no units left to assign them to.)

Carry:  1 Artillery, Armor or Mechanized Infant AND 2 Infantry (*yes they are carrying more units.)  This will make 1 transport missions have bigger impact, allow for navies to need fewer transports, and scale the transport’s ability up to account for more IPC on the map, and help with expanded distances.

@Baron

I agree with consistency for rules as much as possible. My concern is people already try and trade the DEIs. With everything boosted the same the emphasis may continue to be on the DEI. I agree a small Task Force would probably Island Hop anyway, but with limited resources I could see people continue with normal behavior whereas it might encorage multiple Task Forces to island hop without the added incentive to take the DEIs which one would want to do even without a boost.

@barney:

@Baron

I agree with consistency for rules as much as possible. My concern is people already try and trade the DEIs. With everything boosted the same the emphasis may continue to be on the DEI. I agree a small Task Force would probably Island Hop anyway, but with limited resources I could see people continue with normal behavior whereas it might encorage multiple Task Forces to island hop without the added incentive to take the DEIs which one would want to do even without a boost.

Island hopping is a very costly strategy compared to inland maneuver. A lot of warships are at risk and a few ground units will be trade. An active trade off with our reduced cost will probably cost around (DD 6+ TP 8+ Infs 6= )20 IPCs per invasion. Just imagine what could be a 6 Infantry (18 IPCs) trade off about inland strategy for a 3 IPCs TTy: it would appear as an ineffective trade off.
So, even if it provides a 7 IPCs shift for DEI, this bonus can provide more IPCs for other expensive invasion.

This is the reduced cost structure with near OOB cost for planes and Carrier holding 2 planes (Fgs or TcBs).
I also stick to this cost structure (5-6-9-12-15).
I put the 1 hit Transport at 8 IPCs.
I write here many ideas which still fit into core roster at this low cost.
All other ground units are as OOB, except for Tank which no longer gives attack bonus to TacB.

Feel free to quote, erase the quotation and my name, then change the units according to your idea.
This can be a tool to provide a full view of everyone roster.

Unit type  
Cost   Combat values
Special abilities

SUBMARINE
5  IPCs A2fs* D1 M2
Permanent A2 first strike *against all surface vessels only, including DDs.
Cannot hit Sub or Aircraft
Submerge and Stealth Move
On offense, Sub’s commander can allocate each hit whether on transports group or warships group, the owner still choose which individual unit is the casualty.

On defense, Stealth Move allows (but not compel to) each Sub 1 single roll@1 against any ships passing through the Sub’s SZ. Only each Destroyer can get a single retaliate roll @2.

DESTROYER
6  IPCs A2 D2 M2
Block Sub’s Submerge (first round only) and Stealth move, both on a 1:1 basis.

TRANSPORT
8  IPCs A0 regAA1 D0 M2, 1 hit, taken as casualty according to owner’s choice.
Carry 2 units, 1 Inf + 1 any ground unit
No defense against warships,
1 Transport can escape from Naval Battle in the same SZ at each end of combat round, if there is no enemy’s aircraft. Simply remove TP from battle board and place it in the SZ on the map.
Regular AA @1 against up to 1 plane, whichever the lesser.
Can unload in a Sub infested SZ if escorted by surface warships.

If you bring them in with attackers - as you would for amphibious - then any defense shots in excess of what is needed to sink the accompany ships MUST be applied to any transports until all shots are accounted for or there are no units left to assign them to. (Per OOB rule.)

CRUISER
9 IPCs  A3 D3 M3
Shore Bombard 3
Gives +1 move to 1 surface vessel, paired 1:1

FLEET CARRIER
12  IPCs A0 D2 M2, 2 hits,
Carry 2 planes,
damaged Carrier still carry one aircraft.

BATTLESHIP
15  IPCs A4 D4 M2, 2 hits,
Shore Bombard 4

Both repair at purchase and repair phase in a SZ adjacent to a Naval Base SZ, or in NB SZ.
Naval Base cannot repair more than 3 warships hits per turn.

FIGHTER
10 IPCs A3 D4 M4
SBR: A2 D2, interceptors always destroy bombers first.

TACTICAL BOMBER
12 IPCs A4 D3 M4
TBR: A1first strike,  Damage D6 on AB or NB,
SBR: can do escort mission for StBs without bombing AB or NB.

STRATEGIC BOMBER
12 IPCs  A4 D1 M6
SBR:  AA A1first strike up to two Fighters, whichever the lesser,
Damage on IC, AB, NB D6+2 /minimum damage 2 pts if hit by IC’s/AB or NB’s AA gun.
No damage when destroyed by intercepting Fighters.

All aircrafts can hit unsubmerged Submarines without Destroyer presence.

ANTI-AIRCRAFT ARTILLERY
4 IPCs A0 D1 AAx2* M1 CM or NCM, 1 hit,
Taken as last casualty on offence.
*Fire each round @1 first strike against up to two aircrafts, which ever the lesser.
Regular defense @1 if there is no enemy’s plane.

Hi guys,

without actually being aware of your project, I have assembled a set of house rules for G’40 in last days that I would like to try out. I did not read all the posts here, but looks that some of your design principles are same to mine, some are different. My main goal was to improve the balance, discourage players from some unrealistic strategies (bomber stacks, Japan all-in attack on Egypt, Allied fighters in Moscow). Also I did not like that in the top play the blocking and can opening strategies are so dominant. So I introduced special blitz combat to allow each nation for self-can opening. No more a single DD/infantry protecting an empty capital from a massive army. This allows (I think) to change the turn order such that all Axis players are followed by all Allies players, so in a PBEM game of 2 opponents, only 2 emails per round of play are required as opposed to 6 with the OOB rules. This is in principle a factor of 3 speedup!

Here is the full list of house rules I am considering: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tEPbkPockjYiMzeGpjH-0O11t5C4wnAHTsbmeBAlI1k/edit  Feel free to use any of those in your project if you find them interesting/useful. Most of them are not my original ideas anyway. What is nice that I have all of them now implemented in tripleA. I would like to start playtesting them soon, as I am changing so many things it is hard to tell how it will actually play out…

Wish you good luck with your project, looks like you have much more interest from the community now compared to Gamersman01’s G40 league house rule project http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=25260.1410, that kind of died last December :( … hope you will have better luck.

And just a suggestion, maybe you can consider summarizing your project in an online document that can be read by anyone new to the project. Maybe you already have something like that in place but currently it was hard for me to find out what set of changes have you already agreed on, which are considered, proposed, etc… reading a 19 page discussion is not really easy.

cheers, nerquen

I playtested this on a 1941 game mostly to see how unit interactions go.
Here is a few notes.

This is slightly different cost structure because I try to introduce a Carrier holding 3 planes (Fg or TcB).
I also tried to stick as much as possible to 1914 cost structure (6-9-12), including Fg at 6 IPCs.

All other ground units are as OOB.

I really like this 5-6-8-9-12-15 increment for boats.
At lower cost there is more units on this board. Probably impact on the length of play.
The game took 6 hours to conclude with a decisive Allies victory.

To my astonishment there was a lot of heavy warships and planes combat in the first four rounds of play between US and Japan around Hawaii.
Many small battles can be broadly associated with WWII evolution in PTO. Funny coincidence.

Unit type  
Cost   Combat values
Special abilities

SUBMARINE
5  IPCs A2fs* D1 M2
Permanent A2 first strike *against all surface vessels only, including DDs.
Cannot hit Sub or Aircraft
Submerge and Stealth Move

Really more satisfying to roll every time @2 first strike as a special Sub combat ability, even if you don’t get a hit.
Most, if not all Subs were destroyed while attacking.
Even have a 1 UK Sub @2 first strike vs 1 IJN Destroyer D2 turned against the attacking Sub.
Clearly better even match than my previous Sub HR in which Sub A3 D1 and DD A2 D2 and both worth 8 IPCs.
I prefer the weaker value A2 first strike, intuitively more suited to a small unit.
The No sub vs sub makes the job so Submarines were operating independantly from their initial fleet group.
There was no point at following a Transport to protect her from other enemy’s Subs.
This gave me a lot of UK Subs and IJN Subs combat vs DDs and TPs in PTO.

DESTROYER
6  IPCs A2 D2 M2
Block Sub’s Submerge (first round only) and Stealth move, both on a 1:1 basis.

Never get a real chance to block Subs with DD on offence.
But DDs have been use to protect Transports against Subs on all occasions.

TRANSPORT
8  IPCs A0 D0 M2, 1 hit,
Carry 2 units, 1 Inf + 1 any ground unit
No defense against warships,
1 Transport can escape from Naval Battle in the same SZ at each end of combat round, if there is no enemy’s aircraft. Simply remove TP from battle board and place it in the SZ on the map.
Regular AA @1 against up to 1 plane, whichever the lesser.

I played without the no enemy’s aircraft requirement.
Instead, I allowed 1 TP to roll her AA shot or to flee.
This is not a good idea. To much dilemma without any compelling immediate reason.
Such as, do I save 1 TP by fleeing now? Do I take it as casualty instead of a cheaper but better DD Def@2? Do I keep her as an AA platform?
Never clear, fuzzy odds, unclear to decide.

Now I would surely use all the rule above and never allow TP escape as long as there is enemy’s plane present.
Also, I would add that first TP to escape can only start at the end of the second round, not before.
It was too easy to escape after a Sub bad roll on the first round.
I would treat TP evade in a similar way as DD blocking, which is, according to my HR, good for the first round only. TP evasion cannot be better than Sub submerge.
So, the first TP evade can only begin after combat rolls are resolved in the second round. Example, if 2 Subs attack 2 TPs,  each Sub would have roll twice before the first TP can escape.
And if no Sub get a hit on third combat round, then last TP can flee after.

I also like the AA capacity, it provides a small deterrent against StBs which, on this board in particular, can come from very far away without notice and take off-guard a defenseless TP.
1 StB @4 vs 1 DD @2 and 1 TP AA@1 makes for almost even odds.
Another good reason to put Sub on the water against TP.

CRUISER
9 IPCs  A3 D3 M3
Shore Bombard 3
Gives +1 move to 1 surface vessel, paired 1:1

I used this special power on this small map, it helps US to reinforced his carrier fleet with 1DD in addition to the Cruiser. Doesn’t seems that OP since Cruiser is not optimal in combat.
Nonetheless, this Cruiser was sunk by a IJN Subs fleet, letting survive only a damaged Carrier.
Definitely worth a try on a bigger map.

CARRIER
12  IPCs A0 D3 M2, 2 hits,
Carry 3 planes, damaged CV still carry one aircraft.

I better like this Carrier.
First, a damaged one is still working and cripple.
It gives sometime the same dilemma: “How can I save my Fg from being ditch at sea?”
Second, defending @3 make it amongst the last unit to destroy along BB, makes more sense.
However, on offence @0, you can risk and loose it before planes, which keeps the dilemma alive.

BATTLESHIP
15  IPCs A4 D4 M2, 2 hits,
Shore Bombard 4

Were destroyed by Air and Sub, none were built during the game.
Another similarities with WWII.
At 15 instead of OOB 1941 14 IPCs. The small difference was not a factor.

FIGHTER
6 IPCs A2 D2 M4
Always hit aircraft first, then AAA, if any available.
SBR: A2 D2, interceptors always destroy bombers first.

TACTICAL BOMBER
8 IPCs A3 D2 M4
Pick any enemy’s ground unit of your choice as casualty.
TBR: A1first strike Damage D6, can do escort mission without bombing AB or NB.

Greatly reenacted the basic ability of these two units with no big issue.
Need to roll Fgs separetly, and TcB the same.
Giving both special targets makes some battle less armful for the lucky player which can select enemy’s casualty.
The 6-8-10 planes’ cost increment seems OK.
The 6 IPCs Fg D2 makes for a really better defending units than TcB.
The TcB A3 which select ground casualty worth this +2 IPCs higher cost.
In this game, everyone buy both types. Carrier operation saw 1Fg+ 2 TcBs and 2 Fgs+ 1 TcB configuration and less.

However, the odds are within acceptable limits. In some small battles, it happened so the last casualties were Infantry instead of Tank, but on many occasions, the last remaining units were still the costlier ones. And so, even if a lot of planes were involved on the other side.
Clearly prefer this simpler TcB over my other ones which gave a pairing bonus +1 to Tank.
No more combined arms with planes for me.
Thanks LHoffman for your suggestion on my TcB HR unit.

STRATEGIC BOMBER
10 IPCs  A4 D1 M6
SBR:  AA A1first strike up to two Fighters, whichever the lesser,
Damage :  D6+2 /minimum damage 2 pts if hit by IC’s AA gun.
No damage when destroyed by intercepting Fighters.

Cannot say much. There is no SBR in 1941 game.
None was bought.

All aircrafts can hit unsubmerged Submarines without Destroyer presence.

I will not change this. It is so good to follow history on this matter and let planes defend against Sub without bothering about another unit.
Anyway, with A2 first strike, no sub vs sub and 6 IPCs DD A2, Sub is not a good defending fodder anymore and you prefer to keep them for offense most of the time, by submerging.

ANTI-AIRCRAFT ARTILLERY
3 IPCs A0 D1 AAx2* M1 CM or NCM, 1 hit,
Taken as last casualty on offence.
*Fire each round @1 first strike against up to two aircrafts, which ever the lesser.
Regular defense @1 if there is no enemy’s plane.

6 AAA gets 2 consecutive rounds against their full load of planes (12 planes) before being taken as casualty. A single plane was shot down with 24 rolls.
This AAA OP?
I don’t think so.

Hope it can be useful to you people.
On my next playtest, on a 1942.2 map, I hope, I will focus on TP.
The evade capacity help creates a few cat and mice vs Sub in PTO.
I prefer this feature over the auto-kill which, IMO, kill any Battle of the Atlantic reenactment.

Another interesting feature added for Island and Capital City Airfields was 1 Fg or 1 TcB scramble.
This was not too powerful since such planes defend @2.

Also played with advanced air defense on a just conquered TTy or Island.
You can land 1 Fg or TcB on a just conquered TTy or Island if the plane have at least 1 move left.
It increase the fun. And we saw an air support debarkment on DEI turned sour because 1 TcB and 1 Inf left received a hit from the last standing and dying Japanese Infantry.
UK have no option but too destroy TcB to hold DEI, otherwise both units would have been lost.

Also, in all situations except for TcB, Fg and Sub hits the order of casualty choice remains in owner’s hand, best principle IMO.
See you around.

nice work nerquen ! Where is the triplea dl ?

@barney:

nice work nerquen ! Where is the triplea dl ?

Thanks barney, you can download the tripleA patch here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/1pizua6l01to9et/triplea.jar?dl=0 . But don’t overwrite your tripleA installation with this as this version cannot play according to standard OOB rules. So I recommend that you copy paste your tripleA installation folder and then in the new folder replace the file bin/triplea.jar with the one downloaded from the above link.

Then you will need the game setup https://www.dropbox.com/s/6iplovvpx8a1rvq/World War II HR.zip?dl=0, please unizp the downloaded file and then place the “World War II HR” directory into maps/ folder in your new tripleA location. Don’t place the zip file there. For some strange reason I can’t figure out how to make it working with the zip file only.

Also note that my implementation is not enforcing all rules as described in my google document, players have to watch for play according to the rules. For example tripleA would now allow you to move any units in the “Blitz combat” phase. Players have to make sure they obey the restrictions. Also any removal of the units due to deserting a capital or running out of supplies have to be done manually in edit mode, engine does not check for any of those. Also to allow China move out of its territories once it recaptured home, I simply lifted the restriction to keep China home all together so now players have to watch that China actually stays “home” until it has not recaptured all home.

I would be interested in any feedback you might have. You have to consider this only as a fast “beta” release. Once I will have a feedback of couple test games and it will turn out to be a useful variant I will invest more time and make it nicer so that for example the patch would be able to play both the house ruled version as well as the OOB version.

Right on Nerquen thanks. Do you have a thread setup for this ?

Hi Barney. Feel free to play my game, that he set up. I cannot load the map. I am computer retarded.
I want to p[lay, but might be some time!