(Anniversary-1941) Chicago rules - Tech via a Point System

@SouthsideCH:

It seems every time we play there are certain things we just don’t understand. While we understand the rules sometimes they just do not seem rational.

Does anyone have house rules addressing the following?

Artillery supporting infantry during an amphibious assault.

If I move a sub or a destroyer-less navy into a convoy sea zone, forcing the enemy to submerge, why can they convoy me?

It does not make much sense that scramblers are defenders, especially in some cases involving tac bombers.

I get that Kamikaze attacks have to choose their target. But if I bring in 3 cruisers, 2 battleships and a carrier and they choose to hit the battleships, shouldn’t the cruisers get to bombard? They can’t take part in the defense against the Kamikaze.

Convoy Disruption seems easy. There are no ill effects to the disruptor. If you can intercept when facilities are being attacked it makes sense a navy in that sea zone should be able to do the same.

I would love to hear some input on these as well as any house rules ideas.

In terms of house rules, are you looking for balance or realism?

I always argue realism before balance so.

1:No, Artillery should not be able to support infantry during sea invasion, that’s why battleships should be used.

2:I argue they should. The sea territory is vase and submarines are loved during WWII because they are a pain to track down, they are basically the naval sniper.

3: I am not sure the exact issue. Fighters and Tacts can be used offensively and scramble protects your navy. I personally think all allied aircraft should scramble regardless of what nations navy is being attack as long as the nations allows it.

4: Kamikaze wings traditionally went after Battleships and Aircraft Carriers first because taking those out would give the IJN fairness as the IJN had a lot of smaller ships. I personally think Kamikaze wings should also be allowed to target transports.

5: So what’s the issue with Convoy Raids then? It makes you force yourself to deal with an enemy navy.

I am all for any rule ideas that

A) return the US NO money to the contiental states, and not put conditions on it that include islands in the pacific.
B) a “game clock” mechanic that eventually makes the US an undefeatable monstrosity. So the Axis has to win before turn 20 or face an Atomic Superbeast.

Good implications for Battle of Britain etc.  At $10 it would basically take hits from 3 tactical or 2 strategic bombers to destroy a base (after AA).  The best part is it could kill some very gamey phoney baloney moves involving gratuitous bases.  For example:

J1 Japan takes Chahar
J2 Japan builds airbase in Chahar and lands bombers there
UK2 UK pacific bombs Chahar airbase
USSR3 Russia bombs it a second time, destroying it
J3 no Japanese SBR of Moscow

@Gargantua:

Aye BUT a battle in a seazone around England, IS a battle over England according to the rules! :D

I like the concept Jen, I’m just giving you a hard time.

Yes I see that.  I specifically excluded it from the rules - and yer the reason I burned one of my manuals to dust!

I have some additional rules here:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/70044/aaa50-expansion-rules-tech-chart

And the tech chart as an excel:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/70044/aaa50-expansion-rules-tech-chart

They’re for AA50th but should work fine…

Well, it’s not realist to see a lot of japanese tank division because japan didn’t have the capacity to do it. So if a japanese player wants more tank, he must pay the price!

Japanese tank was not bad.In fact most of them were used as infantry tank.
So now if you introduce a tank with a cost of 4 and defend at 1.
Well I will buy more infantry,plane and artillery!

Dora

Dora was the second gun to be produced. It was deployed briefly against Stalingrad, where the gun arrived at its emplacement 15 kilometers (9 miles) to the west of the city sometime in mid-August 1942. It was ready to fire on 13 September. It was quickly withdrawn, however, when Soviet encirclement threatened. When the Germans began their long retreat they took Dora with them. Dora was broken up before the end of the war, being discovered in the west by American troops some time after the discovery of Schwerer Gustav.

In February 1942 Heavy Artillery Unit (E) 672 reorganized and went on the march, and Schwerer Gustav began its long ride to the Crimea. The train carrying the gun was of 25 cars, a total length of 1.5 kilometers. The gun reached the Perekop Isthmus in early March 1942, where it was held until early April. A special railway spur line was built to the Simferopol-Sevastopol  railway 16 kilometers (10 miles) north of the target, at the end of which four semi-circular tracks were built specially for the Gustav to traverse. Outer tracks were required for the cranes which would have assembled Gustav.

The siege of Sevastopol was to be the gun’s first combat test. Installation began in early May, and by 5 June the gun was ready to fire. The following targets were engaged:

* 5 June
          o Coastal guns at a range of 25,000 m. Eight shells fired.
          o Fort Stalin. Six shells fired.
    * 6 June
          o Fort Molotov. Seven shells fired.
          o The White Cliff: an undersea ammunition magazine in Severnaya Bay. The magazine was sited 30 meters under the sea with at least 10 meters of concrete protection. After nine shells were fired, the magazine was ruined and one of the boats in the bay sunk.[3]
    * 7 June
          o Firing in support of an infantry attack on Sudwestspitze, an outlying fortification. Seven shells fired.
    * 11 June
          o Fort Siberia. Five shells fired.
    * 17 June
          o Fort Maxim Gorki and its coastal battery. Five shells fired.

so they we not fired at london. Their collective contribution is totally negligible to anything represented in AA, but add armies of them as you like.

well kamikazi’s were hardly ever succussful so there has to be some realism in its effectiveness