Can we balance this one?

I forgot to add that heavy artilery should have another special ability… If placed on a coastal territory and an invasion takes place, it should get a free preemtive roll against attacking units (they dont shoot back) before the landing units attack but after the naval units fire for shore shots. This would be realistic as it would give the defenders something in return because they really have the advantage with interior lines , while the attackers seem to have more advantage in the game. You may also consider adding the same value to artillery, except that as a result of combat studies ( plugging various types of units in a dice server so understand value relationships) i feel that artillery are very underrated as a buy and giving them this additional value for 4 bucks is a bit excesseve. A last idea that i have been floating is to give for example the uk player a “fortification” in gibrater and adding Malta as a territory on the board. IN this case any ship that passes these spaces get a shot at 4 preemtively. This last idea works very well in axis and allies europe BTW.

@Imperious:

Heavy Artillery:
Heavy artillery cost 6 IP each. Heavy artillery attack at 4 and defend at 2.They have a special alternate form of attack. From any adjacent territory they can instead of normal combat fire one free shot into an enemy occupied territory and not be subject to return fire.

Why pay 15 for a bomber if you are going to have THIS?

Heavy Artillery should only defend on a 1 (try pointing a Paris Gun or a Rail Gun at infantry that is 200 yeards away and closing).  Their only defensive value is in screwing up reinforcements to the front/attack supply lines and the gun crews would have sidearms and rifles.

Also, heavy artillery of this magnitude is extremely cumbersome and should only be able to be moved in the NON-combat phase for use on an adjacent territory the next round (essentially removing it from regular combat role).

NOW you have a piece that would have a value of 6-8.  The initial write up it is damn near a land battleship and should cost 18-20

[Why pay 15 for a bomber if you are going to have THIS?

Heavy Artillery should only defend on a 1 (try pointing a Paris Gun or a Rail Gun at infantry that is 200 yeards away and closing).  Their only defensive value is in screwing up reinforcements to the front/attack supply lines and the gun crews would have sidearms and rifles.

Also, heavy artillery of this magnitude is extremely cumbersome and should only be able to be moved in the NON-combat phase for use on an adjacent territory the next round (essentially removing it from regular combat role).

NOW you have a piece that would have a value of 6-8.  The initial write up it is damn near a land battleship and should cost 18-20](http://Why)

Rationale:

1. they only move 1 space, while bombers move 6
2. they cannot attack naval units or air units
3. a tank has a 3/3 value and moves 2 spaces and costs 5… so you can apply your reasoning to that as well but you know it works just great. This unit costs 6 and has a defense of 2 so in the final analysis they both have value, while the bomber now also is of more value because it wont get shot down as much it has a 1 in 10 chance of going down (instead of 1 in 6).
4. the price is not a fixed point… it can be easilly raised, but in playtesting it works. but if you want then change price to 7-8  IPC range.

As a “technology” item, OK, they work.

Ok but aa guns suck they got to go. they should not be killing planes at a 1 in 6 clip.

@Imperious:

Ok but aa guns suck they got to go. they should not be killing planes at a 1 in 6 clip.

Easy fix…
Remove the restriction on number of guns per territory, and then let them fire ONLY once per gun rather than per plane.  They should also fire each time over flown, not just in combat.

Should get you to about a 1 in 10 without having to introduce polyhedron dice into the game (not everyone is a former D&D player who has d4, d6, d8, d10, d12 and d20 laying around :-) )

Easy fix…
Remove the restriction on number of guns per territory, and then let them fire ONLY once per gun rather than per plane.  They should also fire each time over flown, not just in combat.

I did exactly that.  check it out each artillery fires once at a plane . and the old aa gun can be an extra peice (heavy artillery) the d10 thing is a good fix because 1 out of 6 sucks

Well first off i invite you to join our group of designers who are working hard to produce a historical based ruleset for Revised complete with a redrawn map X2 the size! new player aids… new rules in some cases to repair as we see some glowing ahistorical problems in revised. Also, additonal units may be offered as well.

AS far as your idea… i will study it. It is more than welcome…

Also, if you say that a fleet can only be shot at by one artillery piece, period

I am not sure what this refers too… Under a proposed system for Invasions we are considering:

Attacking BB, CA and possibly DD getting preemtive shore shots ( 4 infantry landed for each shore shot)
Defending artillery preemtive attacks going against invading land forces ( infantry)
Attacking infantry and planes getting normal combat rolls
all remaining defending pieces rolling for defense

On the second round and latter rounds  its:
All attacking pieces ( including now armor units)
All defending pieces

Attacker can retreat after the second round except any landed armor is "converted’ to infantry to represent soldiers escaping with the shirt on their backs back to mommy. All other units can retreat normally onto the landing barges. No ships like in OOB can be hit or take any allocations.

lastly, under this system the retreating side can take a round of “parting shot” fire because we allow attacker or defender can now retreat after any round. Some can be left to obsorb hits and defend, but if the attacker rolls well additional hits go against the retreating defender/attacker.

OK i think by rereading your original port… what your getting at is some “guns of Navarone” thing with using the utility of the AA gun piece as a new coastal gun emplacement ala “atlantic wall” … to help fight off invasions as well as double duty as AA guns again hitting on a zero result.

This could be made to work allowing the AA gun to become more abstracted as a multi purpose defense gun. The AA gun does not belong in a entry level strategic based wargame… Its too specific IMO you simply do not find its utility found in more complicated games like “Third Reich” by avalon hill… what is it doing in our game? i dont know… but your idea is valid.

In the version we use in my group,  Arty Works differently (we think the avalon hill arty rules blow goat cheese)

We leave AA guns alone as a game balance issue…

But on the issue of guns defending an AA we allow arty to fire back at the boats involved in an amphibious assault.

Also note,  Arty  is a 1/2 unit (with first strike) when paired with an infantry (otherwise they are 0/1 no first strike).  So they only attack the incoming boats at 1.  This allows Germany and Japan to build up coastal defences.

As for Islands stopping boats from going by…the ocean is too large for even the biggest guns to do that when stationary. You might catch an unwitting boat who didn’t know you were there once,  but in the end there are hundreds of miles of ocean to cruise in.

In AARHE we plan to make the AA piece represent infrastructure defence.

This is much needed as the game do not model any of that (defences). Amphibious assault against German fortifications (eg. Western Europe) should be a very different story to a casual landing on one of the Pacific islands, or Africa.

Infrastructure defence would consist of coastal batteries, anti-air guns, etc.

As for balancing in this case, a modest study of historic specifications leading to a a good model would avoid any strange/funny situations.