Building Naval Units in a Hostile Seazone

@SGT-Pitbull
Hi Sarge

I’m guessing you mean digitally ? So you can look at a picture instead of setting up the physical board ?

If so, triplea would probably be your best bet as the pics I’ve seen in the past are kinda hard to see detail unless you have multiple pics.

You can’t see the whole map in detail on triplea either, but probably more efficient.

Or do you mean like a print of the physical board ? Like a big poster or map you can roll out ?

Unescorted transports can ignore subs as long as they are not in the sea zone that you are conducting an amphibious assault from. That’s when you need a warship to ignore the sub(s).

The Chinese have strange rules but the exceptions they get makes them exceptional. The ability to raise new units in a newly captured territory is overwhelmingly powerful. Even though they can only raise INF and ART, the ability to have one main stack and move it anywhere while building, instead of having to defend a particular territory, would be gamebreaking if China wasn’t restricted to Chinese territories and Burma and given a fairly low number of starting units.

@ShadowHAwk:

Though the rules are nice it would become hard to play games with a lot more rules, and if you shift the combat abilities of units be carefull not to change the starting balance 2 much. Currently the game is fairly balanced in terms of setup. Changing 1 or even a set of units to be more or less powerfull changes this balance.

ISO giving attacking air units a combat value and a bonus maby only limit this to attacking dive bombers, they needed air support to work.

I finally develop something which can work for both 1942.2 and G40.2.
A 3 planes-Carrier was needed.
In addition, the G40.2 Carrier A0 D3 M2 C16, 2 hits have now an in-built AAA defensive capacity, thanks Wild Bill.  :wink:
By the way, this improved and slightly stronger Carrier on offense and defense will make a better weapon to counter a Dark Sky Strategy.

The cost are reduced for planes and for many units because the interactions will be much deadlier than OOB, here is the thread:
Baron’s simplified TcB (less combined arms), Fg & 3-planes Carrier, full roster
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35643.msg1393799#msg1393799

About the overall balance, here is the trick for planes:
Initial set-up must be change a little:
all full Carriers (1TcB and 1 Fg) received an additional Fg (or a TcB).
Half loaded Carrier with TcB received 1 Fg.
Half loaded Carrier with Fg received 1 TcB.

The overall ratio is for each 2 Fgs you can add 1 Fg and for every 3 TcBs you can put on the start-up board 1 TcB.
Good luck to find the better place to put them.
Usually, it must be added on a given TT which already have plane(s) on it.

The pleasure was on my part, Black_Elk.
I like to find ideas and optimized them inside specific guidelines.
These last one was invented while writing on it, never know that something that I found also interesting could come out of it!

However, it needs someone like you to come with the big picture and completely outside the box ideas.

I will be watching for feedback from your game-plays.

See you around.
Baron

Yeah, I was thinking roughly the same.
Except for the port taking damage but that is just another way to install repaircost ;-).

Only +1 move when moving strategically from a port (no combat during movement), not necessarily to another port, sounds interesting!

And yes guys, destroyers can cause damage to Battleships if operating together with heavier class ships. I still feel it’s more of an exception (and a rather heroic one) than common engagement as DDs without heavier support usually flee to a safe distance if they spot an enemy BB, or sacrifice themselves to protect a bigger prize, for example a crippled and fleeing friendly Battleship.
For the record: I was not talking about CAs or even BCs, however dreadful they might be. Not to mention the exemplary heroics of a DD crew engaging such heavy ships!

YES I would certainly say so.

Thank you.