Global War 1940 2nd ed.

Where do you start do give your combat values for planes?

I simply make an assumption that OOB G40 was the reference.
But I feel Global War is different.

You say you don’t have TcB in initial set-up.
Where is the basic set-up for your map?

If you make a conversion from 2 planes to get a third but don’t change Fighter combat values, I doubt you will get a more balanced game.

When I developed my idea for Fg making hit directly on aircraft, I first try to divide the combat power in half because of increased casualties:
(D12) Fg A3 D4 C7. And it was possible to add 3 Fgs on a Carrier to get almost same combat factor for same cost than 2 Fg A6 D8 C10
3 Fgs A9 D12 C21, 3 hits vs 2 Fgs A12 D16 C20, 2 hits

At least on defense, 10 D4 vs 7 D8 gives odds of survival around: 50% vs 48%.
On a AACalc, you get similar odds of survival between them.

So, 10 divided by 7 gives 1.43 which is near 1.5 so for 2 OOB Fgs I add a third one (2*1.5=3).
But it is not the same if you use higher combat values for Fighter.
You will not preserve the initial set-up balance if adding Fg.

For TcB, I used this scale down 2 pts for each IPC (using 10 IPCs Fg as basis):
10 IPCs A6 D8
9 IPCs A6 D6
8 IPCs A6 D4 or A4 D6
TcB will be better on offense compared to Fg, so I chose A6 D4.

Assuming attack is costlier than defense, it makes sense if Fg A4 D4 C7 to get TcB A6 D4 C8
So, when Fg A4 is attacking TcB D4, it is same values (but since Fg cheaper, it remains better unit)
TcB A6 attacking Fg D4, TcB is better but because I use Fg hit directly aircraft there was no issue about it.

However, with StBs it is another case:
StB A8 C12 vs Fg D4 C7 was quite an issue.
I partly solved it knowing that 7A8 worth same in Calc as 10D4.
So, a 12 IPCs bomber is not better than defending Fg.
And not at all on offence considering that 12 Fg A4 are better than 7 StB A8.

OOB StB A8 C12 vs Fg D8 C10 is on par in absolute value, but since Fg is cheaper we still view it as better on defense.

However, I was not totally happy of my number.
I rather like something which clearly show how Fg are superior on defense against bombers.

Something like bomber C5 totally solved it.
If it have no regular combat value. Problem solved.
You keep it for SBR dogfight.

A StB A1 or A2 C5 (is the lowest combat number) against Fg D4 C7 it makes a very good match, if not perfect.

TcB A2 C8 (is the same lowest combat number but higher cost) showed it is not better than StB against Fg in air combat.
But TcB A6 D4 C8 can be part of regular combat and pick ground unit upon hit, which is pretty descriptive on what can be done from air.
All units can fight air vs air.

IDK if these cost are really slowing things down because 7+8+5 gives 20 IPCs or 7+8 gives 15.
Also 7 and 8 are usual numbers for TPs and DDs.

IMO it solved all symbolic issues with combat values.

Now if I look at Fg A6 D6 or D7 C10 it is weaker on defense against StB A8 D2 C11.

And your game is safe because German player don’t play Dark Sky to make abusive Heavys power projection.
But your weaker Fg D7 being on 2 planes Carrier cannot compete against a flock of StBs A8 M7-8 C12.
Using correctly such Superweapon, your US fleet wouldn’t dare to land in North Africa.
Running a few simulations even with Fg D8, it requires 3 scrambling Fgs and even best 6 Fgs to get a good cover.
Buying A0 D4 C16 Carrier for 2 Fgs D8 was difficult to manage.
36 IPCs: 3 StBs A24, 3 hits vs 1 full Carrier D20, 4 hits is quite enough to survived: 20% vs 75%, but you don’t bring any other units.
Nonetheless you have a few room for TPs.

If you drop to 3 StBs A24 vs D16 (2 Fg D6 + CV D4): 46% vs 48%, you cannot buy any TPs.

Any invasion force would be weaker than StBs on the same IPCs basis.

Number below makes for 6 StBs vs 2 Full Carrier with Fg A6 D6.
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=6&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=&dBom=&dTra=2&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=4&dCar=2&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Tra-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=

If you add 2 StBs for 2 TPs+4 Infs you gets 95% vs 5% odds of survival. So you are completely toasted.

So Germany may repel any US invasion if Fg are A6 D6.

With Fg A6 D8 C10 you gets 83% vs 13%.
http://calc.axisandallies.org/?mustland=0&abortratio=0&saveunits=0&strafeunits=0&aInf=&aArt=&aArm=&aFig=&aBom=8&aTra=&aSub=&aDes=&aCru=&aCar=&aBat=&adBat=&dInf=&dArt=&dArm=&dFig=4&dBom=&dTra=2&dSub=&dDes=&dCru=&dCar=2&dBat=&ddBat=&ool_att=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Sub-SSub-Des-Fig-JFig-Cru-Bom-HBom-Car-dBat-Tra&ool_def=Bat-Inf-Art-AArt-Arm-Tra-Bom-HBom-Sub-SSub-Des-Car-Cru-Fig-JFig-dBat&battle=Run&rounds=&reps=10000&luck=pure&ruleset=AA1942&territory=&round=1&pbem=

And you only bring 2 TPs! A single TP for each fully loaded Carrier.

It is the best I can do to show the issue of a too low defense factor for Fighters

If I can get figs at C10 A6 D8, nobody will buy bombers. I’ll take fig D8 before a Bomber D2.

This is your suggestion.
Fig A6 D8 M4 C10 4 or less roll get to hit a plane on A and D.
Tac A6 D4 M4 C10 can pick hit on ground or naval.
Stg. Bomber A8 D2 M6 C10 1D6
H. Bomber A8 D2 M7 C12  1D6 +2

Dog fighting ? Fig A3 D3
                      Tac A1
                  Stg. B A1
                  H. Bom A2
Or are you suggesting using normal A D values for dog fighting ?

I have Carriers at A5 D5 M2 C14 2 hits.

Basic setup is under Deaths Head thread just below mine in Global War 40 click on page 1
But I’ve added some pieces to game and added more ground in SA do to Italy having no pressure on them in games.

@SS:

If I can get figs at C10 A6 D8, nobody will buy bombers. I’ll take fig D8 before a Bomber D2.

This is your suggestion.
Fig A6 D8 M4 C10 4 or less roll get to hit a plane on A and D.
Tac A6 D4 M4 C10 can pick hit on ground or naval.
Stg. Bomber A8 D2 M6 C10 1D6
H. Bomber A8 D2 M7 C12  1D6 +2

Dog fighting ? Fig A3 D3
                       Tac A1
                   Stg. B A1
                   H. Bom A2
Or are you suggesting using normal A D values for dog fighting ?

I have Carriers at A5 D5 M2 C14 2 hits.

Basic setup is under Deaths Head thread just below mine in Global War 40 click on page 1
But I’ve added some pieces to game and added more ground in SA do to Italy having no pressure on them in games.

What is weird is the whole G40 OOB is based on these bombers values at 12 IPCs:
If I can get figs at C10 A6 D8, nobody will buy bombers. I’ll take fig D8 before a Bomber D2.

And someone decided to try a massive StBs purchase and developped Dark Sky strategy.

In addition, your StBs A8 D2 is cheaper, and same cost as Fg A6 D8 would.

For dogfighting in SBR I would not change that much (but you have D12 digit):
Dog fighting ? Fig A3 D3
Fig A3 D3
Tac A2
Stg. B A1
H. Bom A2
or
Fig A4 D4
Tac A2
StB A2
H. B A3

Carriers at A5 D5 M2 C14 2 hits.
It helps a bit with Fg D6, but full Carrier defense is not as high as it can be (compared to G40 OOB full Carrier with Fgs)
Carriers at A5 , really?

What the historical evolution of your Fighter vs Bomber units.
Does HBG or Global War have different OOB values compared to G40?

Global are Fig C10 Tac C11 Stg. B C12.

You said in past posts why not make all 3 planes C10 and H. bom 12. instead of 9, 10, 11, 12

I’m just gonna go with Fig A6 D8 M4 C10    4 roll or less hits plane
                                    Tac A6 D5 M4 C10    pick piece
                                    Stg. B A8 D2 M6 C11  1D6
                                    H. Bom A8 D3 M7 C12  1D6 +2 or 2D6 -2.
Fig A4 D4
Tac A2
Bom A2
H. Bom A3 for dog fighting.

Carriers are A0 D5 M2 C14 2 hits. The A5 for carrier was a miss type in last post.

Theres some confusion going a little.

Are you sure of these bomber cost?

Stg. Bomber A8 D2 M6 C11  1D6
Heavy Bom A8 D3 M7 C12  1D6 +2 or 2D6 -2.

Just on a simple look, I will always buy Heavy because 1 IPC higher is not a big deal and +1M is cool, because on your map a lot of ICs are with 4 TTys away, so M8 with AB bonus is far more valuable and Heavy get D3 instead of D2. Damage +2, also.
It is a lot.

At 10 for St Bomber vs 12 for Heavy with same stats as above, I would probably wonder what is my real need about bombers?
May I saved 2 IPCs going with StB instead or will it be worth because I need an M8 unit?

That would be my inner thoughts if I was going to play…

Yes agree. I make the Stg Bomber C10 ?

@SS:

Yes agree. I make the Stg Bomber C10 ?

It is up to you SS.
I just feel that on your big map, StBs doing D6 damage can be 10 IPCs.
And you also get an opportunity to see amongst fellow players how it makes for a faster game or not when 3 planes have same 10 IPCs cost.
Easier to count, and easier to change idea just before purchasing without taking too long.
And if you still play with Fg “4” or less hitting planes, you save a few bucks for normal attrition due to this targeting capacity.

I’ll go with the C10 Bomber. I’m courious to see what the fig D8 does for Germany on any allies invasions in France

Here’s some pics of game after 4 turns. Also Charts showing the NA’s the Countries have (get to roll for 2 at beginning of each game) with Victory City’s and other Chart is the Tech each country has and there ICP totals. Went back to mostly normal piece values. Looks like a good show down in the Pacific.
Invasion coming soon in Europe and Italy is gonna need to help.
This game we got a bit more tech involved with good break thru die rolls and a couple free techs and 2 countries had there Spy’s steal tech but both steals didn’t really help that country but still an awesome event card to have in game. If at all possible have this in your game some how (Spy steals research papers for tech. You get 1 tech that the other side has. Your choice).

For us this game has a bit of everything and things at least change every game. The Tech is working out great so far. US has 4 research tokens and rolled 4 die last turn and didn’t get a break thru, but that is coming. Will they get a good tech and help win the game or get a useless one ? You roll 4  6’s you only get 1 tech roll for chart. Then you lose all tokens. US got a free research token at the wrong time. You want that when you don’t have any tokens.

Here’s the 2’ x 3’ magnetic charts showing what each country has in game and so far as tech.

Sorry for some glare, charts will be moved soon.

You got to go back 1 post to see game report and map pics.

The chart with the nations along with special abilities comes from what set of rules? I am not familiar with them.

The NAs come from revised game with some modifications. That is the first chart.

I will post final game report soon. But on turn 7 Japan took Calcutta and will see if Germany takes Moscow turn 8. I don’t see the Allies getting any VC’s back by end of turn 10 for keeping the Axis at 14 or less VC’s for an Allies win.

After 7 turns there’s 11 techs out there between the sides and nothing really throwing the game off. Japan does have -1 for each ground they buy and that has helped them in India with tanks. I can see why a Jap tank went to A5 instead of a 6.
But Russia had same tech but got it to late in game.

So with the added Tech and NA’s with Event Cards and Generals game still seemed to go in that normal direction. Take Moscow and Calcutta. With the added Victory Points conditions this should change up the game even more.

I’m going to try for new victory conditions. I like the Victory Point system that BL E, Baron , Agr, and some of the others guys are discussing in the House rules section for the 42 game.

I can see where Germany doesn’t have to take Moscow or London to win. If it has to be tweaked so be it. If I need to add more City’s with points will see.

Baron, or any body else.

These are my Victory city’s in game. I’m trying to make it where adding the Victory points to game to change up more of the game.

3 point Victory City’s
                                  Moscow    USSR
                                  Berlin        Ger
                                  London      UK
                                  Tokyo        Japan
                                   D.C.          US
                                   Rome      Italy

2 point Victory City’s
                                   Paris          Ger
                                   Leningrad  USSR
                                   Hawaii        US
                                   ShangHai    Japan
                                   Manilla        US
                                   S.F.              US

1 point Victory City’s
                                   Stalingrad        USSR
                                   Sydney            UK
                                   Oslo                  Ger
                                   Ottawa            UK
                                   Cairo                UK
                                   Johannesburg  UK
                                   Honk Kong        UK 
                                   Warsaw            Ger
                                   Calcutta          UK
                                   Peking              Japan
                                   Milan                Italy
                                   Changkhun      Japan
                                   Siagon            Japan

Allies have total points of 24  need 4 more points to win

Axis have total points of 19    need 9 to win.

28 points wins you the game.

I don’t want to add or take away any Victory City’s. Just trying to change the way the game goes some what. Now the axis may have to many points to get to win if US gets a good push in the Pacific. So I may have to lower there total points to win.

Any thoughts out there ?

Can you marks each VCs on last post so it will be able to see on glance which is on which side?

Ya I’ll edit it. Forgot.

@SS:

Ya I’ll edit it. Forgot.

Thanks, it is still difficult to get the whole picture.
Maybe if you portray it by ETO vs PTO with value in order and near VC, it will help make the count.
Example:
Value City side or power
PTO Allies
2 San Francisco US
2 Hawaii US
1 Calcutta UK
1 Sydney UK

PTO Axis
3 Tokyo Japan
Calcutta worth only 1?

PTO Allies
3 Sydney
2 Hawaii
2 Calcutta
1 Manilla
1 L. A.
1 Hong Kong

PTO Axis
3 Tokyo
2 Shanghai
2 Peking
1 Changkhun
2 Saigon

ATO Allies
3 Moscow
3 London
2 Washington
2 Lengingrad
2 Stalingrad
1 Cairo
1 Johannsburg

ATO Axis
3 Berlin
3 Rome
3 Paris
1 Oslo
1 Milan
1 Warsaw

The Allies start with 24 points and Axis with 22 points. First one to 30 points and holds for a turn wins the game.

@SS:

PTO Allies
2 Hawaii
2 Manilla
2 San Fran
1 Honk Kong
1 Sydney
1 Calcutta�

PTO Axis
3 Tokyo
2 Shanghai
1 Peking
1 Changkhun
1 Saigon

ATO Allies
3 Moscow
3 London
3 Washington
2 Lengingrad
1 Stalingrad
1 Ottawa
1 Cairo
1 Johannsburg

ATO Axis
3 Berlin
3 Rome
2 Paris
1 Oslo
1 Milan
1 Warsaw

Calcutta only worth 1. Want Japan to hold more of there city’s and still win the game without taking Calcutta every dam game. Also might make Japan go after Hawaii or Sydney more and sending less to Calcutta.

Here is a few combinations to make an Axis win without Center Crush on Russia:
19 points + 4 ETO + 5 PTO = 28 PTs
2 Leningrad
1 Stalingrad
1 Cairo

2 Hawaii
2 Manilla
1 Honk Kong
or
2 Manilla
1 Honk Kong
1 Sydney
1 Calcutta

or 6 pts PTOs:
2 Hawaii
2 Manilla
1 Honk Kong
1 Sydney

and 3 pts amongst :
2 Leningrad
1 Stalingrad
1 Cairo

Seems more easily able to grab more PTO VCs than ETOs.
So Japan might have do the work to releave Germany from trying to get these 6 points + 19 = 25 points:
3 Moscow
2 Lengingrad
1 Stalingrad

Here, I’m not sure if that works because technically a German KO on Russia means game over. But still 3 points short of winning.
So, no matter the number of VC pts on PTO, it will be irrelevant. Unless Allies KJF is pushing hard toward Japan.

Don’t be shy on report. I will read it.

The actual Redesign VCs 40 list for G40 and 30 VCs list for 1942.2 is in part inspired by this one.

We added a few VCs within grasp of Germany to increase an Axis Victory.
We didn’t set the number of VCs (1 point each) required per Theater or Globally.
I suggested that this given number be kept at the end of the next game round to call the winning side.

I have no problem with changing City point values if need be to get a more balanced on both sides or for countries sides. The need for 28 points to win can be lowered.
I also want it where Germany doesn’t need to take Moscow to win. With pressure in Paris landings if any and Germany also needs to protect Oslo. Maybe losing Oslo will be enough for a Allies win and US getting good pressure in the Pacific. Like I mentioned in past post maybe axis needing 9 points to get to 28 might be to high. But I don’t see that happening yet with to much US pressure in Pacific.
Have to play test it.

Another question is how many turns do we need to play in game before it gets to long ? I still like it to be a 10 turn game max.

I will post results soon.