US Liberty ships

@crsluggo Hi crsluggo,

When British Commandos are supported by artillery in an attack, they attack at “3” - and the artillery at “2” as usual.

After the attack, any surviving Commandos operate under regular infantry rules - but they are still Commandos.

So, during any future attack they (again) attack at “3” - when supported by artillery. Otherwise they attack at “1” as regular infantry - even though they are Commandos.

In other words; the artillery unit is the key.

The same rule applies to US Marines.

Please note: German Waffen-SS infantry units have similar qualities when supported by Waffen-SS Artillery.

why not be able to just upgrade a cruiser you allready own?
for 7 IPC’s for a battle ship

or just bring them damage into play

@Ichabod:

Baron,
Good point. So also let fighters hit other planes EVERY time they roll a 1 during a battle.

To Wild Bill and Ichabod,
Not so long ago I put this on one of my thread, with Word file Doc to print a summary of a full roster with many HRs, as player’s help :

FIGHTER A3 D4 M4, SBR A2 D2 Cost 8
Air combat unit, Fighter as an Air Superiority aircraft: All “1” and “2” rolls are allocated to aircraft units first, if any available, then AAA, and finally other kind of units (owner’s choice).
Fighter as part of an extended Air Defense System:
1942.2, 1 Fg can scramble from an Air Base/Victory City.
SBR/TcBR Attack @2, Defend @2.

Can hit unsubmerged submarines without Anti-Sub Vessel.

TACTICAL BOMBER A4 D3 M4 Cost 10
All “1” rolls are allocated to any aircraft OR ground units of your choice,
All “2” rolls are allocated to any ground units of your choice.
This can makes for Tactical Bomber as a “Dive Bomber” and “Tank Buster”:

1942.2, 1 TcB can scramble from an Air Base/Victory City.

SBR/TcBR Attack @1 first strike,
TcBR damage: 1D6.

Can hit unsubmerged submarines without Anti-Sub Vessel.

I think I overreacted on the Italian situation. I foresaw UK being able to focus more on Italy in this compared to a normal game, since Britain’s income is centralized due to Halifax, and because it can probably afford to redirect Pacific forces west since USA in the Pacific isn’t as immediate of a threat to Calcutta as Japan was. Additionally, to defend the mobilization of Spain, I moved France’s destroyer by Madagascar to the Mediterranean to block off a Italian T1 transport heading to Gibraltar.
To counterbalance that I made one of Italy’s NO more attainable, upgraded 2 infantry to mechs, gave a free tank and artillery already in Africa, combined the Somalian infantry with the Ethiopians which is almost like giving an extra infantry, gave a free destroyer, and took away an ANZAC infantry from Egypt and a UK AAA from Malta.

But there’s another big factor to consider. Like, uh, I don’t know… USA PLAYING ON THE OTHER TEAM, MAYBE?? ;)

So! I’m changing some of that, and that’s the biggest change of these tweaks here. I acknowledge most of these changes are in favor of the Allies. I now present v1.4, which I intend to be playable as-is and the last of this series of changes, until I play some real games myself or get feedback from you kind or heartless souls. ^_^

v1.3 —> v1.4 changes
-Burma: -1 Infantry, -1 Fighter, +1 Artillery
-switched Cruiser and Battleship in SZ37/SZ39 (this and the Burma changes were actually done a while ago, I just forgot to write them down)
-removed extra tank in Libya, re-separated Somalian infantry, returned Malta AAA
-added to Story (Greenland)
-placed Commonwealth transport in SZ106 (Canada should have SOME sort of Navy, right?)
-removed extra Inf in Slovakia
-changed Eastern Mex standing army to 3 Inf (from 2)
-simplified Commonwealth defense perimeter NO
-modified Commonwealth 1st NO to require Ontario or Quebec (to encourage US player to strike fast and not overwhelm them separately)
-modified UK anti-sub NO to exclude eastern US coast
-fixed Russian lend-lease NO to not penalize Russia for support from allies
-added 2 Inf in Borneo
-added 1 Inf in Hawaii
-fixed a conflicting statement about Bolivia (Bolivia is Pro-Allies)

Hainan cant be captured by the chinese, and serves the same sz.

Tanks don’t have to be adjacent to their attacking territory either. They can move 2 spaces to attack. For example, say you have a tank in Germany and you are attacking Baltic states. You can move through Poland with your tank and attack Baltic States.

In fairness to the Japanese planners:

“After the initial salvo at long range (20,000 meters), the four Kongo Class battleships and 17 Class A cruisers detailed to the night attack force were to break through the American screen–suicidally if necessary–and clear the way for the force’s two torpedo cruisers and the light cruiser and 14 destroyers of a destroyer squadron to expend the remainder of their ready torpedoes in a close range attack from as little as 2,000 meters.”

IF they had ever actually gotten the massive fleet battle at night (without radar, which they couldn’t plan for, since they didn’t know about it), and acually managed to get a significant number of cruisers and destroyers to 2,000 meters or less, they might have had a chance of achieving the 15% hit rate.  But a lot of their planning DID involve timing their actions to coincide with Mr. Murphy’s annual vacation  :lol:

@Imperious:

Yes yes quite right, but if you want people in the ocean you just lower the cost of naval units so they will buy them, and add rules regarding modeling submarine warfare where the subs can attack IPC of nations.

What i saw was one problem that was related to the “double income collection problem” and offered a solution that would seem less painful than the cure that proposed.

That is what I’m sugesting.  I think all naval cost would have to be lowered and new sub rules implemented.  No air only attacks sub detection etc. then subs would be able to target transports with raw materiels in them.  You are right about the double income and I started playing that way after I got my copy of The War Game.  I think a big aspect of the war was moving materiels and this would be a fun option.

another thing this does is eliminate the need for income tracking.  and I also would agree that the cash would have to be dispersed once per round.  I’m not sure if this is and advantage for any one player, I will have to think about it some more.